Investigation shows power law relationships in acoustic emission signals and avalanche shapes, indicating key parameters influence signal transfer.
Abstract Power law correlation between the rising time, \(\:R\), and amplitude,\(\:\:A\), of the detected acoustic emission, AE, signals of crackling noises is investigated in the framework of a driven damped harmonic oscillator model. It is shown that the \(\:R~{A}1-φ\:\) relation holds, similar to the well-known enigma for acoustic emission between the detected energy, \(\:E\) and amplitude, \(\:A\), as well as area, \(\:S\), and amplitude (\(\:E~{A}3-φ\:\:\)as well as \(\:S~{A}2-φ\:\), where 3 and 2 are the expected exponents from the mean field theory, MFT), with the same value of \(\:φ\:\). For the experimental value \(\:{φ\:}ₑₓₚ={φ\:}AE+{φ\:}ₒ\) fulfils, where \(\:{φ\:}AE\) results from transfer distortions of AE signals and \(\:{φ\:}ₒ\) is the exponent in the power relation between the amplitude and the rising time of the source function (\(\:{φ\:}ₒ=-0.32\) beyond the MFT and \(\:{φ\:}ₒ=0\:\)in MFT). The calculated value of \(\:{φ\:}AE=1\) is in good agreement with experimental data obtained for different jerky structural changes: \(\:{φ\:}ₑₓₚ\:0.8±\:0.2\). Well scaled together universal functions can be obtained for the temporal avalanche shapes at fixed area normalizing the voltage by \(\:A\) and the time by \(\:R~{A}1-φ\:\). The first part (around the peak) of it is not sensitive to transfer distortions, while the tail region can be heavily distorted.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Azim et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: