MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023778182 · doi:10.1063/1.4821497

Observation of microscopic damage accumulation in brittle solids subjected to dynamic compressive loading

2013· article· en· W2023778182 on OpenAlexaff
Sheng Huang, Kaiwen Xia, Heng Zheng

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Scientific Instruments · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicHigh-Velocity Impact and Material Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSplit-Hopkinson pressure barDynamic loadingBrittlenessMaterials scienceBar (unit)Composite materialDeformation (meteorology)Dynamic load testingStrain rateGeotechnical engineeringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dynamic failure of brittle materials is a fundamental physical problem that has significantly impacts to many science and engineering disciplines. As the first and the most important step towards the full understanding of this problem, one has to observe dynamic damage accumulation in brittle solids. In this work, we proposed a methodology to do that and demonstrated it by studying the dynamic compressive damage evolution of a granitic rock loaded with a modified split Hopkinson pressure bar system. To ensure consistency of the experimental results, we used cylindrical rock samples fabricated from the same rock core and subjected them to identical incident loading pulse. Using a special soft recovery technique, we stopped the dynamic loading on the samples at different strain levels, ranging from 0.3% to 1.4%. Therefore, we were able to recover intact samples loaded all the way to the post-peak deformation stage. The recovered samples were subsequently examined with X-ray micro-CT scanning machine. Three dimensional microcrack network induced by the dynamic loading was observed and the evolution of microcracks as a function of the dynamic loading strain was obtained.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.334
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

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

Citations46
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Scientific InstrumentsSame topicHigh-Velocity Impact and Material BehaviorFrench-language works237,207