Nonlinear constants of quartz thirty years after the first nonlinear elastic tensor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thirty years have expired since the determination (in 1966) of the third-order elastic constants of /spl alpha/-quartz by Thurston, McSkimmin and Andreatch, Jr. As their calculation was made disregarding the piezoelectric character of quartz, the values of the constants are distorted. The distortions have propagated into the entire family of the existing values of the third-order electromechanical constants of quartz including electroelasticity, electrostriction and third-order permittivity. They have also afflicted a recent attempt to determine the third-order elastic constants which was intended to correct the original omission. Independently of these distortions, strong statistical evidence suggests a significant lack of agreement among the third-order constants obtained by independent methods. For these two reasons the available values of the third-order nonlinear constants of /spl alpha/-quartz-31 constants in total-are not the true material constants and should be recalculated. A meaningful attempt to do so could be based on the available experimental data which should be analyzed using a nonlinear theory applied to all data consistently and without substitutions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".