MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412403279 · doi:10.1103/hl63-8xm9

Data-driven analysis of acoustic emission signals for the distinction of deformation mechanisms

2025· article· en· W4412403279 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Emil Bronstein, Eilon Faran, Ronen Talmon, Doron Shilo

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Materials · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRock Mechanics and Modeling
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAzrieli FoundationIsrael Science Foundation
KeywordsAcoustic emissionMaterials scienceDeformation (meteorology)AcousticsComposite materialPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mechanical behavior of most materials involves discrete ``avalanche'' events, where a local microscopic volume within the bulk undergoes large abrupt deformations. Such events are commonly detected and analyzed based on the acoustic emission (AE) they generate. Many materials display several deformation mechanisms simultaneously, thus calling for analysis tools that can differentiate between the AE signals they produce. We introduce a new classification method where the power-spectral densities of AE signals are mapped onto a two-dimensional space by the $t$-distributed stochastic neighbor embedding (tSNE) algorithm. To study the effectiveness and accuracy of these tools, we produced ground-truth datasets of AE signals generated by dislocation plasticity, deformation twinning, and martensitic transformation. This is achieved by loading three different alloys, each characterized by a single deformation mechanism. We show that each dataset has different distributions of AE features, thus strengthening the necessity to distinguish between AE signals generated by different deformation mechanisms. Moreover, an analysis that does not separate deformation mechanisms, and instead considers the combined datasets, provides distributions that lead to specious conclusions. The two-dimensional representation applied by our data-driven method displays three distinct clusters, which are also identified by the $k$-means clustering algorithm. The clusters match the ground-truth datasets with an accuracy of 98.6%, implying the method's capability to distinguish between different deformation mechanisms that coexist in the same 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 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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.929
Threshold uncertainty score0.196

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review MaterialsSame topicRock Mechanics and ModelingFrench-language works237,207