2014
DOI: 10.1122/1.4870967
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Inferring meaningful relaxation spectra from experimental data

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

1
33
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(36 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
1
33
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Germany) 60 which is a numerical procedures based on the regularization method proposed by Honerkamp and Weese, 61 following the eqn (13):…”
Section: View Article Onlinementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Germany) 60 which is a numerical procedures based on the regularization method proposed by Honerkamp and Weese, 61 following the eqn (13):…”
Section: View Article Onlinementioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition the dynamical-mechanical data were used to determine tentative relaxation spectra according to the method of Stadler and Bailly, 24 which was found to provide the most accurate spectra among several methods tested. 25 This method does not calculate the spectrum itself by determining different modes individually but describes the spectrum with a spline whose knots (as spectrum descriptors) are adjusted in logarithmized relaxation strength logH-position and logarithmized relaxation time log to set up a continuous spectrum, discretized at 10 modes per decade. This is sufficient to describe all except for the most sharp spectra for which a higher mode density is necessary to obtain an accurate spectrum.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From this viewpoint, the work of Dealy and coworkers is valuable (McDougall et al 2014). They compared three algorithms of continuous spectrum (FPI, NLREG, and CHS) and an algorithm of discrete spectrum [IRIS (Baumgärtel and Winter 1989)].…”
Section: Comparison With Simulated Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is Fig. 6 of McDougall et al (2014). It must be noted that the modulus data for this calculation were generated with 4 % random error [see Fig.…”
Section: Comparison With Simulated Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation