MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307885302 · doi:10.1250/ast.43.297

Sound mechanics from squeaky and booming dune sands

2022· article· en· W4307885302 on OpenAlexaff
A. J. Patitsas

Bibliographic record

VenueNippon Onkyo Gakkaishi/Acoustical science and technology/Nihon Onkyo Gakkaishi · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAeolian processes and effects
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVibrationShear (geology)GeologyAcoustic emissionMaterials scienceFrequency bandGrain sizeSlip (aerodynamics)Geotechnical engineeringCollisionComposite materialAcousticsPhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is verified that the source of the acoustic emissions when beach sand or other squeaky grains are stepped on or impacted by a pestle lies in a thin shear band directly under the pestle. The grain layers in this band slide one over another at a slow creepy pace giving rise to energy transfer, via the stick-slip effect, from the impacting pestle to the elastic vibrations in the shear bands at the grain contact areas. In turn, this vibration energy feeds the elastic modes of vibration along the vertical grain columns or equivalently, the elastic modes of vibration in the shear band under the pestle comprising the vibrating columns, with dominant frequency in the range of 1,000 Hz. In search of an explanation of the acoustic emissions when booming dune sand is pushed by a blade or is freely avalanching, we adopt the concept of the collision shear band, where, due to the high degree of fluidity of the sand mass, the grain layers slide one over another at a brisk pace so that the average collision frequency between grains in two adjacent grain layers defines the dominant frequency of the acoustic emission in the range of 100 Hz.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.613
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.206
Teacher spread0.198 · 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.

Study designOther design
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNippon Onkyo Gakkaishi/Acoustical science and technology/Nihon Onkyo GakkaishiSame topicAeolian processes and effectsFrench-language works237,207