MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Second-Order Sensitivities of Inelastic Finite-Element Response by Direct Differentiation

2008· article· en· W1967178250 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Engineering Mechanics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinite element methodSensitivity (control systems)Computer scienceOrder (exchange)Work (physics)Mathematical optimizationAlgorithmMathematicsElectronic engineeringEngineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper analytical equations are developed and implemented to obtain second-order derivatives of finite-element responses with respect to input parameters. The work extends previous work on first-order response sensitivity analysis. Of particular interest in this study is the computational feasibility of obtaining second-order response sensitivities. In the past, the straightforward finite difference approach has been available, but this approach suffers from serious efficiency and accuracy concerns. In this study it is demonstrated that analytical differentiation of the response algorithm and subsequent implementation on the computer provides second-order sensitivities at a significantly reduced cost. The sensitivity results are consistent with and have the same numerical precision as the ordinary response. The computational cost advantage of the direct differentiation approach increases as the problem size increases. Several novel implementation techniques are developed in this paper to optimize the computational efficiency. The derivations and implementations are demonstrated and verified with two finite-element analysis examples.

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)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.815
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.217 · 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