MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Possible Approaches in Modelling Rearrangement in a Microstructured Material

2007· article· en· W1984082216 on OpenAlexaff
Salvatore Federico, Alfio Grillo, Walter Herzog, G. Giaquinta, Shoji IMATANI

Bibliographic record

VenueKey engineering materials · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComposite Material Mechanics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeformation (meteorology)StiffnessStress fieldMaterials scienceField (mathematics)Matrix (chemical analysis)Inclusion (mineral)Internal stressStress (linguistics)Composite materialMechanicsPhysicsMathematicsFinite element methodThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Biological materials can be regarded as composites with spheroidal and fibre-like inclusions, representing cells and collagen fibres, respectively. The orientation and arrangement of the inclusions in a biological tissue is crucial to the determination of the mechanical properties of the material. Furthermore, the reorientation and rearrangement of the inclusions due to the deformation and external forces is of primary interest when dealing with growth and remodelling. We propose to look at the presence of inclusions as a source of internal hyperstaticity: when the material undergoes deformation, a generic inclusion is drifted by the deformation, but at the same time it “feels” the stress field and tends to carry a portion of stress proportional to its stiffness relative to that of the surrounding matrix. With this assumption, we can extend the classical “drift” evolution law for the unit vector field, in order to take the hyperstaticity into account. This method might be used in the description of remodelling in disordered media, such as biological tissues, and may be extended to investigate the reorientation of preferred directions of micro-structural elements in media described with a continuum approach.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.169 · 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

Citations4
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKey engineering materialsSame topicComposite Material MechanicsFrench-language works237,207