MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2249574647 · doi:10.3970/cmc.2005.002.039

Numerical analysis of parameters in a laminated beam model by radial basis functions

2005· article· en· W2249574647 on OpenAlexaff
Y.C. Hon, Leevan Ling, K.M. Liew

Bibliographic record

VenueCmc-computers Materials & Continua · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Thin Films
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeflection (physics)Rigidity (electromagnetism)Beam (structure)Materials scienceMechanicsPhysicsOpticsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we investigate a thermal driven Micro-Electrical-Mechanical system which was origi- nally designed for inkjet printer to precisely deliver small ink droplets onto paper. In the model, a tiny free-ended beam of metal bends and projects ink onto paper. The model is solved by using the recently developed radial basis functions method. We establish the accuracy of the proposed approach by comparing the numerical results with reported experimental data. Numerical simulations indicate that a light (low composite mass) beam is more stable as it does not oscillate much. A soft (low rigidity) beam results in a higher rate of deflection, when com- pared to a high rigidity one. Effects caused by the values of physical parameters are also studied. Finally, we give a prediction on the optimal time for the second current pulse which results in maximum rate of second deflec- tion of the beam. keyword: Micro-Electrical-Mechanical system, Ther- mal driven, Radial Basis Functions method

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations14
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCmc-computers Materials & ContinuaSame topicFluid Dynamics and Thin FilmsFrench-language works237,207