MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1814041376 · doi:10.12783/jmc.v1i2.62

Damage in Hybrid Composite Laminates

2013· article· en· W1814041376 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Haleh Allameh Haery, Ho Sung Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Cases · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Behavior of Composites
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComposite materialDelamination (geology)Composite laminatesEpoxyComposite numberCrackingResidual strengthGlass fiberMaterials scienceStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hybrid laminates consisting of woven glass fabric/epoxy composite plies and woven carbon fabric/epoxy composite plies are studied for fatigue damage and residual strength. A theoretical framework based on the systems approach is proposed as a guide to deal with the complexity involving uncertainties and a large number of variables in the hybrid composite system. A relative damage sensitivity factor was developed for quantitative comparisons between non-hybrid and hybrid composites, which may be useful for developing inexpensive composites with low damage sensitivity. Hypotheses derived from the theoretical framework were tested and verified using evidence from both micro- and macro-scopic damage patterns. The first hypothesis was that the difference between two different sets of properties produces shear stress in interface between carbon fibre reinforced plastics (CRP) and glass fibre reinforced plastics (GRP), and eventually become a source for CRP/GRP interfacial delamination or longitudinal cracking. The second hypothesis was that inter-fibre bundle delamination occurs more severely to CRP sub-system than GRP sub-system. .

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical CasesSame topicMechanical Behavior of CompositesFrench-language works237,207