MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2226868912 · doi:10.4271/2005-01-2279

Improving the Efficiency of Sealing Parts for Hollow Body Network

2005· article· en· W2226868912 on OpenAlexaff
Jean-Luc Wojtowicki, Raymond Panneton

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Applied Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceEngineering drawingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="htmlview paragraph">Nowadays, expanding sealing parts in automotive hollow body networks are widely used. These parts are usually made up from expanding foams or an assembly of expanding foams and solid materials. The use of these sealing parts has demonstrated an influence on the noise inside the car. These findings proved the necessity of designing sealing parts especially to reduce the propagation of sound through the frame cavities and hollow bodies. In this work, experimental investigations have been conducted to characterize the acoustic performances (absorption, transmission loss) of the individual materials constituting the parts and their assembly. Some design rules have been extracted to improve their efficiencies. Also, to better understand the acoustic behavior of the expanding foams, existing theoretical models for closed or open foams have been tested and compared to measurements. The comparisons showed the importance of accounting for the resonant and non-resonant surface absorption of these closed-cell foams. A simplified modeling of the expanding foam consisting of an elastic core surrounded by a resistive layer is proposed and compared to measurements.</div>

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)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations9
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicEngineering Applied ResearchFrench-language works237,207