MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2746735512 · doi:10.1093/gji/ggx353

Matrix eigenvalue method for free-oscillations modelling of spherical elastic bodies

2017· article· en· W2746735512 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Eliška Zábranová, Ladislav Hanyk, Ctirad Matyska

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Journal International · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysics and Gravity Measurements
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAkademie Věd České RepublikyGrantová Agentura České RepublikyHuman Resources Research Institute
KeywordsEigenvalues and eigenvectorsEigenfunctionMathematical analysisDiscretizationBoundary value problemMathematicsClassical mechanicsChebyshev polynomialsMatrix (chemical analysis)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deformations and changes of the gravitational potential of pre-stressed self-gravitating elastic bodies caused by free oscillations are described by means of the momentum and Poisson equations and the constitutive relation. For spherically symmetric bodies, the equations and boundary conditions are transformed into ordinary differential equations of the second order by the spherical harmonic decomposition and further discretized by highly accurate pseudospectral difference schemes on Chebyshev grids, we pay special attention to the conditions at the centre of the models. We thus obtain a series of matrix eigenvalue problems for eigenfrequencies and eigenfunctions of the free oscillations. Accuracy of the presented numerical approach is tested by means of the Rayleigh quotients calculated for the eigenfrequencies up to 500 mHz. Both the modal frequencies and eigenfunctions are benchmarked against the output from the Mineos software package based on shooting methods. The presented technique is a promising alternative to widely used methods because it is stable and with a good capability up to high frequencies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.729
Threshold uncertainty score0.397

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Journal InternationalSame topicGeophysics and Gravity MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207