MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1903171476 · doi:10.1002/nme.4786

An updated Lagrangian method with error estimation and adaptive remeshing for very large deformation elasticity problems

2014· article· en· W1903171476 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Numerical Methods in Computational Mathematics
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFinite element methodLagrangianHyperelastic materialLagrange multiplierProjection (relational algebra)Computer scienceElasticity (physics)Applied mathematicsDistortion (music)Adaptive mesh refinementMathematical optimizationAlgorithmMathematicsStructural engineeringEngineeringComputational science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY Accurate simulations of large deformation hyperelastic materials by the FEM is still a challenging problem. In a total Lagrangian formulation, even when using a very fine initial mesh, the simulation can break down due to severe mesh distortion. Error estimation and adaptive remeshing on the initial geometry are helpful and can provide more accurate solutions but are not sufficient to attain very large deformations. The updated Lagrangian formulation where the geometry is periodically updated is then preferred. However, it requires data transfer from the old mesh to the new one and this is a very delicate issue. In this paper, we present an updated Lagrangian formulation where the error is estimated and adaptive remeshing is performed in order to reach high level of deformations while controlling both the accuracy of the solution and mesh distortion. Special attention is given to data transfer methods and a very accurate cubic Lagrange projection method is introduced. A continuation method is used to automatically pilot the complete algorithm including load increase, error estimation, adaptive remeshing, and data transfer. A number of examples will be presented and analyzed. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.959

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.353 · 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