Comparisons between trumpet models using numerical continuation methods
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
This thesis describes the use of numerical continuation methods to analyze the behavior of a modeled trumpet-player system, and to make comparisons between the instruments based on parameters that are relevant to players.The acoustic impedances of four B trumpets were measured, and modal parameters were derived to describe each measured impedance.The modal impedance parameters were then incorporated into a physical model representing the player-trumpet system.Linear stability analysis (LSA) was used to refine the lip frequency parameter used, and then the system was studied using numerical continuation methods to determine how the mouthpiece pressure varies with the blowing pressure.Bifurcation diagrams of downstream mouthpiece pressure versus upstream blowing pressure were generated using the numerical continuation software Manlab, and it was found that all four trumpets displayed subcritical, or inverse, Hopf bifurcations at the note onset.This means that each instrument displayed hysteresis behavior, so that the minimum onset blowing pressure and dynamic were higher than the extinction blowing pressure and dynamic.The location of the Hopf bifurcation point, the mouthpiece pressure at an estimate of the players' maximum blowing pressure, and location of the fold, where the oscillating solution becomes extinct as the blowing pressure is reduced, were determined for each instrument.The locations of these landmarks were used to make
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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