MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154156355 · doi:10.1109/isaf.2000.941517

The variation of piezoelectric and electrostrictive strain as a function of frequency and applied electric field using an interferometric technique

2002· article· en· W2154156355 on OpenAlexaff
A. J. Masys, Gang Yang, Bhaskar Mukherjee

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicFerroelectric and Piezoelectric Materials
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectrostrictionElectric fieldPiezoelectricityInterferometryField (mathematics)Function (biology)Materials scienceStrain (injury)AcousticsOpticsPhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A Zygo laser interferometer system has been used to measure the strain induced in piezoelectric lead zirconate titanate (PZT) and electrostrictive lead magnesium niobate (PMN) based ceramics. The piezoelectric coefficients d/sub 33/, d/sub 31/ and d/sub 15/ of PZT ceramics have been determined as a function of electric field and frequency. The strain and polarization of PMN-PT ceramics have been measured at AC fields of up to 4 MV/m. For PMN-based ceramics, the results suggest that a quadratic relation of strain with polarization (S=Q/spl middot/P/sup 2/) is not valid at high electric fields and higher order terms must be considered. DC bias measurements at room temperature showed that the maximum d/sub 33/ of PMN-15 ceramics was 800 pm/V at the bias field of 0.67 MV/m and had little frequency dependence in the frequency range from 1 Hz up to 2.5 kHz. However, PMN-38 ceramic, with a maximum d/sub 33/ of 1200 pm/V at the bias field of 0.43 MV/m, showed frequency dependence from 1 Hz up to 2.5 kHz.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.215 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFerroelectric and Piezoelectric MaterialsFrench-language works237,207