Acoustical determination of the parameters governing thermal dissipation in porous media
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, the question of the acoustical determination of macroscopic thermal parameters used to describe heat exchanges in rigid open-cell porous media subjected to acoustical excitations is addressed. The proposed method is based on the measurement of the dynamic bulk modulus of the material, and analytical inverse solutions derived from different semiphenomenological models governing the thermal dissipation of acoustic waves in the material. Three models are considered: (1) Champoux–Allard model [J. Appl. Phys. 20, 1975–1979 (1991)] requiring knowledge of the porosity and thermal characteristic length, (2) Lafarge et al. model [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 102, 1995–2006 (1997)] using the same parameters and the thermal permeability, and (3) Wilson model [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 94, 1136–1145 (1993)] that requires two adjusted parameters. Except for the porosity that is obtained from direct measurement, all the other thermal parameters are derived from the analytical inversion of the models. The method is applied to three porous materials—a foam, a glass wool, and a rock wool—with very different thermal properties. It is shown that the method can be used to assess the validity of the descriptive models for a given material.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".