MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408501372 · doi:10.37934/araset.64.1.152163

Experimental Study: Effect of Resonator Parameter Upon the End Correction for Quarter Wavelength Resonator Tube

2025· article· en· W4408501372 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Muhammad Hatifi Mansor, M. S. M. Sani, Mohd Firdaus Hassan, Ellyawan Setyo Arbintarso

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Research in Applied Sciences and Engineering Technology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGyrotron and Vacuum Electronics Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversiti Malaysia Pahang
KeywordsResonatorQuarter (Canadian coin)Tube (container)WavelengthHelical resonatorOpticsMaterials scienceAcousticsPhysicsComposite materialHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acoustic resonators are fundamental in various engineering applications, from musical instruments to advanced sound filtering systems. Their ability to amplify and sustain specific frequencies has made them indispensable in modern technology. This study presents a comprehensive parametric investigation of acoustic resonators, aiming to identify the effect of parameter changes on the acoustical length and standing wave that significantly influence their performance and efficiency of acoustic energy harvesting design. The research methodology involves experimental analysis to explore the effects of various geometric on the resonator's acoustic end correction and standing wave. The study focuses on traditional Quarter wavelength resonators, and parameters such as resonator shape, size, length, and backplate thickness are systematically varied and studied. The findings of this parametric study provide valuable insights into the optimisation of acoustic resonators for energy harvesting purposes. The impact of parameters like tube length 30cm and diameter 8cm on standing wave is quantified, enabling engineers to tailor resonator designs to meet precise requirements. Other parameters are also vital in constructing a resonator tube that can deliver optimal output when considering other usage circumstances. Furthermore, novel design concepts that demonstrate improved performance compared to conventional resonators are proposed, expanding the possibilities for optimum output of acoustic energy harvesting systems.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.400
Threshold uncertainty score0.293

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.340 · 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.

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced Research in Applied Sciences and Engineering TechnologySame topicGyrotron and Vacuum Electronics ResearchFrench-language works237,207