Classification of the major nonlinear regimes of oscillations, oscillation properties, and mechanisms of wave energy dissipation in the nonlinear oscillations of coated and uncoated bubbles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acoustic waves are dissipated when they pass through bubbly media. Dissipation by bubbles takes place through thermal damping (Td), radiation damping (Rd), and damping due to the friction of the liquid (Ld) and friction of the coating (Cd). Knowledge of the contributions of Td, Rd, Ld, and Cd during nonlinear bubble oscillations will help in optimizing bubble and ultrasound exposure parameters for the relevant applications by maximizing a desirable outcome or oscillation pattern. In this work, we investigate the mechanisms of dissipation in bubble oscillations and their contribution to the total damping (Wtotal) in various nonlinear regimes. By using a bifurcation analysis, we have classified nonlinear dynamics of bubbles that are sonicated with their third superharmonic (SuH) and second SuH resonance frequency (fr), pressure dependent resonance frequency (PDfr), fr, subharmonic (SH) resonance (fsh = 2fr), pressure dependent SH resonance (PDfsh), and 1/3 order SH resonance, which are important exposure ranges for various applications. The corresponding Td, Rd, Ld, Cd, Wtotal, scattering to dissipation ratio, maximum wall velocity, and maximum backscattered pressure from non-destructive oscillations of bubbles were calculated and analyzed using the bifurcation diagrams. Universal ultrasound exposure parameter ranges are revealed in which a particular non-destructive bubble related phenomenon (e.g., wall velocity) is enhanced. The enhanced bubble activity is then linked to relevant ultrasound applications. This paper represents the first comprehensive analysis of the nonlinear oscillations regimes, the corresponding damping mechanisms, and the bubble related phenomena.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".