MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7116061694 · doi:10.82417/tp8f-sh65

The existence of truncation resonance in TPMS-based periodic acoustic metamaterials

2025· other· en· W7116061694 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueEspace ÉTS (ETS) · 2025
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFedDev OntarioUniversity of WaterlooNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsTruncation (statistics)Resonance (particle physics)MetamaterialAcoustic resonanceModalUnit (ring theory)Modal analysisAcoustic metamaterials

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Truncation resonance represents peaks that manifest within the bandgap frequency range of periodic metamaterials. This phenomenon stands in contrast to the general conclusion regarding the absence of peaks within bandgap frequency ranges. Truncation resonance is attributed to finite periodic metamaterials, whereas bandgaps pertain to infinite periodic metamaterials. The present study examined the occurrence of truncation resonance in one-dimensional periodic metamaterials constructed from repeated primitive unit cells, observed within the acoustic spectrum. The investigation was geometric-based, considering 10 periodic metamaterials with different relative densities and number of repeated unit cells. This investigation employed both bandgap data and modal analysis, wherein natural frequencies, modeshapes, and Acoustic Pressure Responses (APRs) were integral components of the modal analysis. Following an analysis of APRs, the study was further inspired to scrutinize the numerator of the modal-solved APR. Through analyzing the APR numerator, this work demonstrated the coexistence of truncation resonance and bandgaps in periodic metamaterials.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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 venueEspace ÉTS (ETS)French-language works237,207