MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007739389 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.63.094110

Statics and dynamics of domain patterns in hexagonal-orthorhombic ferroelastics

2001· article· en· W2007739389 on OpenAlexaff
S. H. Curnoe, A. E. Jacobs

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. B, Condensed matter · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAcoustic Wave Resonator Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStaticsOrthorhombic crystal systemCondensed matter physicsElasticity (physics)PhysicsMaterials scienceClassical mechanicsMathematicsDiffractionThermodynamicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the statics and the dynamics of domain patterns in proper hexagonal-orthorhombic ferroelastics; these patterns are of particular interest because they provide a rare physical realization of disclinations in crystals. Both our static and dynamical theories are based entirely on classical, nonlinear elasticity theory; we use the minimal theory consistent with stability, symmetry, and ability to explain qualitatively the observed patterns. After scaling, the only parameters of the static theory are a temperature variable and a stiffness variable. For moderate to large stiffness, our static results show nested stars, unnested stars, fans and other nodes, triangular and trapezoidal regions of trapped hexagonal phase, etc. observed in electron microscopy of ${\mathrm{Ta}}_{4}\mathrm{N}$ and Mg-Cd alloys, and also in lead orthovanadate (trigonal-monoclinic) and samarium sesquioxide (hexagonal-monoclinic); we even find imperfections in some nodes, like those observed. For small stiffness, we find patterns like those observed in the mineral Mg-cordierite. Our dynamical studies of growth and relaxation show the formation of these static patterns, and also transitory structures such as 12-armed bursts, streamers, and striations which are also seen experimentally. The major aspects of the growth-relaxation process are quite unlike those in systems with conventional order parameters, for it is inherently nonlocal; for example, the changes from one snapshot to the next are not predictable by inspection of the strain patterns alone.

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations31
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. B, Condensed matterSame topicAcoustic Wave Resonator TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207