MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1526610761 · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139017657.006

Mechanical conservation and balance laws

2011· book-chapter· en· W1526610761 on OpenAlexaff
Ellad B. Tadmor, Ronald E. Miller, Ryan S. Elliott

Bibliographic record

VenueContinuum Mechanics and Thermodynamics · 2011
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElasticity and Material Modeling
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConservation lawGeneralizationBalance (ability)Classical mechanicsKinematicsPhysical lawSet (abstract data type)LawMechanicsMathematicsPhysicsComputer scienceMathematical analysisPolitical scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the previous chapter, we derived kinematic fields to describe the possible deformed configurations of a continuous medium. These fields on their own cannot predict the configuration a body will adopt as a result of a given applied loading. To do so requires a generalization of the laws of mechanics (originally developed for collections of particles) to a continuous medium, together with an application of the laws of thermodynamics. The result is a set of universal conservation and balance laws that apply to all bodies: conservation of mass; balance of linear and angular momentum; thermal equilibrium (zeroth law of thermodynamics); conservation of energy (first law of thermodynamics); second law of thermodynamics. These equations introduce four new important quantities to continuum mechanics. The concept of stress makes its appearance in the derivation of the momentum balance equations. Temperature, internal energy and entropy star in the zeroth, first and second laws, respectively. In this chapter we focus on the mechanical conservation laws (mass and momentum) leaving the thermodynamic laws to the next chapter. Conservation of mass A basic principle of classical mechanics is that mass is a fixed quantity that cannot be formed or destroyed, but only deformed by applied loads. Thus, the total amount of mass in a closed system is conserved. For a system of particles this is a trivial statement that requires no further clarification.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.005

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.172
Teacher spread0.160 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueContinuum Mechanics and ThermodynamicsSame topicElasticity and Material ModelingFrench-language works237,207