MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3108856179 · doi:10.1121/1.5147474

Spectral analysis of turbulent boundary layer pressure fluctuations collected by a MEMS microphone array

2020· article· en· W3108856179 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ethan Saff, Robert D. White

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerodynamics and Acoustics in Jet Flows
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbulenceBoundary layerSpectral densityAcousticsMicrophone arrayPhysicsMach numberOpticsMicrophoneMechanicsComputer scienceSound pressureTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A MEMS-based microphone array was previously constructed to collect and measure pressure fluctuations due to turbulence under flat plate turbulent boundary layers with high spatial resolution (≈1.3 mm). Data were collected from this array at Mach numbers up to 0.6 and Reynold's numbers up to 107 per meter in three flow facilities, at NASA Ames, the Univ. of Toronto, and Spirit Aerosystems. The measured pressure fluctuations are being processed to identify the turbulence characteristics of the data. Comparisons of the single point power spectral density to previously existing models, such as those of Chase and Goody, as well as wave speed estimates derived from the phase slope, suggest that turbulent characteristics are significantly present in the measured data. In a variety of different cases, the data will be compared to the Corcos model for cross spectral density in streamwise, spanwise, and intermediate directions to further confirm the data's validity and to quantitatively investigate the validity of the separable model used in Corcos's expression.

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)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.212
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicAerodynamics and Acoustics in Jet FlowsFrench-language works237,207