Cyclic deformation behavior of an epoxy polymer. Part II: Predictions of viscoelastic constitutive models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The experimental results presented in Part I of this study were used to evaluate the predictive capabilities of two viscoelastic constitutive models. One of the models, developed by Xia and Ellyin, is in a differential form. The other, which is a modified Schapery model by Lai and Bakker, is in an integral form. The results of the comparison indicate that the Xia‐Ellyin constitutive model simulated the experimental observations well. This was attributed to the existence of a general rule that delineates the loading and unloading parts of the cyclic response. The modified Schapery model was able to predict the general trends of the deformation behavior; however, it was unable to correctly simulate the unloading behavior. This difference became more pronounced when the applied cyclic stress/strain was high. At high applied loads, the material response became more nonlinear. POLYM. ENG. SCI. 45:103–113, 2005. © 2004 Society of Plastics Engineers
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".