MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Kelvin Probing Technique: A Promising Method for the Determination of the Yield Strain of a Solid under Different Types of Stress

2002· article· en· W1997641954 on OpenAlex
Dongyang Li

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

Venuephysica status solidi (a) · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicForce Microscopy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceYield (engineering)Ultimate tensile strengthStress (linguistics)Strain (injury)Stress–strain curveComposite materialCompressive strengthDeformation (meteorology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has long been recognized that the yield point of a solid material differs under different loading conditions. However, it is difficult to directly determine the yield strain or stress of the solid under complex loading conditions. As a result, the yield strain or stress measured by tensile testing is usually used for analyzing, predicting and modeling mechanical behavior of solid materials under different loading conditions. This article proposes a promising method, Kelvin probing technique, to determine the yield strain of solid materials and thin films under tensile and compressive stresses, respectively. This method could also be extended to the determination of the yield points of thin films and components in micro-devices under different types of stress.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.306

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.294 · 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