MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009817055 · doi:10.1115/imece2002-32494

Maximum Entropy Methods in the Mechanics of Quasi-Static Deformation of Granular Materials

2002· article· en· W2009817055 on OpenAlexaff
N. P. Kruyt, L. Rothenburg

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGranular flow and fluidized beds
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGranular materialPrinciple of maximum entropyStatistical physicsHydrostatic equilibriumEntropy (arrow of time)Probability density functionStatistical mechanicsMechanicsContact mechanicsClassical mechanicsProbability distributionPhysicsMathematicsFinite element methodThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In statistical physics of dilute gases maximum entropy methods are widely used for theoretical predictions of macroscopic quantities in terms of microscopic quantities. In this study an analogous approach to the mechanics of quasi-static deformation of granular materials is proposed. The reasoning is presented that leads to the definition of an entropy that is appropriate to quasi-static deformation of granular materials. This entropy is formulated in terms of contact quantities, since contacts constitute the relevant microscopic level for granular materials that consist of semirigid particles. The proposed maximum entropy approach is then applied to two cases. The first case deals with the probability density functions of contact forces in a two-dimensional assembly with frictional contacts under prescribed hydrostatic stress. The second case deals with the elastic behaviour of two-dimensional assemblies of non-rotating particles with bonded contacts. For both cases the probability density functions of contact forces are determined from the proposed maximum entropy method, under the constraints appropriate to the case. These constraints form the macroscopic information available about the system. With the probability density functions for contact forces thus determined, theoretical predictions of macroscopic quantities can be made. These theoretical predictions are then compared with results obtained from two-dimensional Discrete Element simulations and from experiments.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGranular flow and fluidized bedsFrench-language works237,207