Theory of similarity and ultrasonic testing
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Application of similarity theory (dimensional analysis) to ultrasonic (UT) testing is discussed using as an illustration the example of concrete blocks. The concept of dimensional analysis makes it possible to represent a physical system via a minimal set of variables, the so-called π groups, which are the dimensionless quantities. These dimensionless parameters, characterizing the respective phenomenon, should have approximately equal values for the real object and for the model. Small concrete samples have been tested in the lab conditions using various UT probes and techniques. Two dimensionless criteria, valid and similar for the real field case and for the laboratory samples, have been introduced: total attenuations of UT waves and ratios of void size to the UT wavelength. To get total attenuations in the field conditions for thick concrete block, similar to the total attenuations measured in lab experiments on small samples, one should apply the low-frequency UT waves 60-100kHz. However, these UT waves will be able to reliably detect only the large inhomogeneities (e.g. voids), whose size is about half of the used UT wave, i.e. inhomogeneities with dimensions larger than 20-40mm.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it