MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993931216 · doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2015.02.023

Total Life Approach for Fatigue Life Estimation of Welded Structures

2015· article· en· W1993931216 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

VenueProcedia Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFatigue and fracture mechanics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural engineeringFracture mechanicsWeight functionStress intensity factorWeldingParis' lawDivision (mathematics)Materials scienceVibration fatigueCrack closureConstant (computer programming)AmplitudeStress concentrationFatigue testingEngineeringComputer scienceMathematicsComposite materialMathematical analysisPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It was shown that estimation of fatigue lives of welded joints can be successfully carried out by considering the fatigue process as a fatigue crack growth from the initial intrinsic crack size of a0=ρ* until the final crack af. Such an approach avoids a somewhat arbitrary division of the fatigue process into the crack initiation and propagation and concentrates on using only one methodology - the fracture mechanics theory. The stress intensity factors can be determined in such cases by the weight function method. The proposed methodology allows estimation of the fatigue life under both constant and variable amplitude loading.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.845
Threshold uncertainty score0.734

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.197 · 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