MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993128734 · doi:10.4271/2014-01-0902

A Mesoscopic-Stress Based Fatigue Limit Theory - A Revised Dang Van's Model

2014· article· en· W1993128734 on OpenAlexaff
Virgiliu-Adrian Savu, Yung–Li Lee, Anthony Han, Azadeh Narimissa, Amir Kazemi

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFatigue and fracture mechanics
Canadian institutionsChrysler (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMesoscopic physicsStress (linguistics)Limit (mathematics)Statistical physicsComputer sciencePhysicsMathematicsCondensed matter physicsMathematical analysisPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dang Van (Dang Van et al., 1982 and Dang Van, 1993) states that for an infinite lifetime (near fatigue limit), crack nucleation in slip bands may occur at the most unfavorable oriented grains, which are subject to plastic deformation even if the macroscopic stress is elastic. Since the residual stresses in these plastically deformed grains are induced by the restraining effect of the adjacent grains, it is assumed that the residual stresses are stabilized at a mesoscopic level. These stresses are currently approximated by the macroscopic hydrostatic stress defined by the normal stresses to the faces of an octahedral element oriented with the faces symmetric to the principal axis; mathematically they are equal to each other and they are the average of the principal stresses. This paper proposes and supports the novel hypothesis of normal stress to the maximum shear stress plane being an alternative to the octahedral normal stress, and better aligning with the restraining effect of the adjacent grains defined by Dang Van Multi Scale 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.231
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

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicFatigue and fracture mechanicsFrench-language works237,207