Mutual radiation impedance for modeling of multi-frequency CMUT arrays
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently closely packed interlaced capacitive micromachined ultrasonic transducers (CMUTs) with different membrane sizes, on a scale smaller than the acoustic wavelength to mitigate grating lobes, have been introduced for multi-band operation, imaging-therapy, contrast and photoacoustic imaging. An accurate model including the effects of the self and mutual acoustic interactions between CMUT cells for simulating the multi-frequency arrays is necessary. However, the previous works evaluated the effects of the mutual radiation impedance on CMUT arrays with the same membrane sizes. Using the Bouwkamp integral method for integrating the farfield directionality factor of two flexural disks with different sizes, vibrating in phase, series expressions have been obtained for the mutual radiation impedance between two circular radiators of different radii in a rigid plane. Models for the mutual acoustic impedance between membranes of different sizes were validated against previous piston results but extended to flexural disks. The obtained expressions were implemented in an equivalent circuit model of multi-frequency CMUTs. Model predictions of resonance frequencies and displacements closely matched experimental vibrometer measurements of multi-frequency CMUT arrays that were done for low and high frequency transducers.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".