MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969993941 · doi:10.1243/030932405x16043

Weight functions for <i>T</i> -stress for semi-elliptical surface cracks in finite-thickness plates

2005· article· en· W1969993941 on OpenAlexafffund
Xiao Dong Yu, Xin Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Strain Analysis for Engineering Design · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFatigue and fracture mechanics
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsWeight functionFinite element methodStress (linguistics)Parametric statisticsBendingTension (geology)Point (geometry)Materials scienceSurface (topology)Finite thicknessGeometryStress concentrationParametric equationFunction (biology)MathematicsStructural engineeringComposite materialMathematical analysisMechanicsPhysicsCompression (physics)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the application of the weight function method for the calculation of elastic T-stress for semi-elliptical surface cracks. First, the weight function method for the calculation of T-stress previously developed for two-dimensional crack problems was extended for the T-stress calculation for three-dimensional crack problems. Then, the T-stress weight functions for the deepest point (corresponding to the parametric angle ϕ = 90°) and for any general point (5° ≤ ϕ < 90°) along the crack front of semi-elliptical surface cracks in finite-thickness plates for wide ranges of crack aspect ratios a/c and relative depths a/t were derived. The resulting weight functions were validated using available finite element results for non-linear stress fields and remote tension and bending cases, and very good agreement was achieved. The weight functions are suitable for the calculation of the T-stress under complex loading conditions for any general point (5° ≤ ϕ ≤ 90°) of surface cracks with wide ranges of aspect ratios, 0 ≤ a/c ≤ 1, and relative depths, 0 ≤ a/t ≤ 0.8.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.223
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations10
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Strain Analysis for Engineering DesignSame topicFatigue and fracture mechanicsFrench-language works237,207