MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013049191 · doi:10.1142/s0219876204000150

NOVEL COUPLING CONSTRAINT TECHNIQUE FOR EXPLICIT FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS

2004· article· en· W2013049191 on OpenAlexaff
Rong-Tai Ho, S. A. Meguid, R. G. Sauve ́

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Computational Methods · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComposite Structure Analysis and Optimization
Canadian institutionsAtomic Energy (Canada)University of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinite element methodRobustness (evolution)Constraint (computer-aided design)Nonlinear systemComputer scienceAlgorithmTensor (intrinsic definition)SalientContext (archaeology)Coupling (piping)Rotation (mathematics)Representation (politics)MathematicsMathematical optimizationGeometryStructural engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligencePhysicsMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a unified novel technique for enforcing nonlinear beam-to-shell, beam-to-solid, and shell-to-solid constraints in explicit finite element formulations. The limitations of classical multi-point constraint approaches are examined at length, particularly in the context of explicit solution schemes. Novel formulation of a generalized constraint method that ensures proper element coupling is then presented, and its computer implementation in explicit integration algorithms is discussed. Crucial in this regard is the accurate and efficient representation of finite rotations, accomplished using an incremental rotation tensor. The results of some illustrative test cases show the accuracy and robustness of the newly developed algorithm for a wide range of deformation, including that in which large rotations are encountered. When compared to existing works, the salient features of the current method are in evidence.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Computational MethodsSame topicComposite Structure Analysis and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207