High-frequency dynamic acoustic field manipulation method and its application to flaw evaluation and imaging
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
Existing approaches for acoustic field manipulation using acoustic lenses mainly focuses more on low-frequency, particularly audible range, and static fields with limited applicability to ultrasonic regimes. This paper proposes a megahertz-range rotational acoustic field manipulation method based on an acoustic lens and investigates its application in flaw evaluation and imaging. Theoretical analysis of dynamic acoustic field propagation was conducted at frequencies up to the megahertz range, leading to the formulation of a motion-modulated transmission model to describe field regulation. Additionally, a composite flaw evaluation method was introduced based on directional rotation of the dynamic field. Simulation and experimental results demonstrate that this method offers superior performance in directly identifying the orientation and size of flaws with a maximum angle error of only 0.3%. Compared to traditional ultrasonic imaging, this method provides 15% and 18% improvements in accuracy of angle and size, respectively, and presents an efficient guide for dynamic ultrasonic field manipulation and directional field application.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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