MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3026150240 · doi:10.1088/1361-6439/ab94d1

Large oscillation of electrostatically actuated curved beams

2020· article· en· W3026150240 on OpenAlexafffund
Ayman M. Alneamy, Mahmoud Khater, Majed Al‐Ghamdi, Ahmed Abdelaziz, G. R. Heppler, Eihab Abdel‐Rahman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Micromechanics and Microengineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMechanical and Optical Resonators
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersKing Fahd University of Petroleum and MineralsKing Abdulaziz City for Science and TechnologyJazan UniversityCMC Microsystems
KeywordsCascadePeriod-doubling bifurcationPhysicsAttractorChaoticOscillation (cell signaling)BifurcationGalerkin methodBeam (structure)Classical mechanicsMathematical analysisMathematicsOpticsQuantum mechanicsNonlinear system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper investigates the responses of initially curved micro-beams subjected to an electrostatic excitation. A Euler–Bernoulli beam theory is utilized to derive the governing equation of motion. A reduced-order model was developed by discretizing the equation of motion using straight beam mode shapes as basis functions in a Galerkin expansion. The results show evidence of the superharmonic resonances of order-three and two in addition to primary resonance. The co-existence of multiple stable orbits observed around only one stable equilibrium and under excitation waveforms with RMS voltage less than the snap-back voltage. These branches are a branch of small orbits within a narrow potential well and two branches of medium-sized and large orbits within a wider potential well. The transition between them results in the characteristic of the double peaks appearing in the frequency-response curve. We also report a bubble structure along the medium-sized branch consists of a cascade of period-doubling bifurcations and a cascade of reverse period-doubling bifurcations. A chaotic attractor develops within that structure at larger excitation levels. It demonstrates evidence of chaos with a wide-based spectrum and an elevated noise-floor. Odd-periodic windows appear also within the attractor including period-three (P-3), period-five (P-5) and period-six (P-6) windows. The chaotic attractor terminates in a cascade of reverse period-doubling bifurcations of period-four (P-4) orbits and period-two (P-2) orbits.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.296
Threshold uncertainty score0.383

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 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

Citations16
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Micromechanics and MicroengineeringSame topicMechanical and Optical ResonatorsFrench-language works237,207