MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Implementation of Likhachev’s Model into a Finite Element Program

2013· article· en· W1969460757 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

VenueMaterials science forum · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicShape Memory Alloy Transformations
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinite element methodProcess (computing)Displacement (psychology)ActuatorController (irrigation)Iterative and incremental developmentAdaptation (eye)Simple (philosophy)Stress (linguistics)Element (criminal law)Mechanical engineeringComputer scienceControl engineeringStructural engineeringMaterials scienceEngineeringArtificial intelligenceProgramming languageSoftware engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Shape memory alloys have become very popular over the past few decades, mainly as actuators or superelastic devices. Their complex behavior complicates the design process of these applications, and several models have been developed to assist design engineers in this endeavor. One of these models, the structure-analytical theory proposed by Likhachev, is particularly attractive because it is physically grounded and capable of dealing with tensorial stress and strain states. Unfortunately, its stress-controlled formulation has hindered its implementation in displacement-based finite element programs. This paper presents an adaptation of Likhachev’s model leading to a strain-controlled formulation based on an iterative algorithm and a proportional controller. The resulting model is implemented in ANSYS and a simple finite element analysis is carried out to illustrate its appropriate functioning.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.296 · 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