MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030040017 · doi:10.2514/2.2033

Force Method Revisited

2003· article· en· W2030040017 on OpenAlex
Ramin Sedaghati, Afzal Suleman

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

VenueAIAA Journal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComposite Structure Analysis and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinite element methodCompatibility (geochemistry)GaussForce field (fiction)Classical mechanicsStructural mechanicsContinuum mechanicsStructural engineeringMathematicsComputer scienceApplied mathematicsPhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Computational mechanics is an important field in engineering with a strong foundation in continuum mechanics and finite element analysis. The standard and integrated force methods are reviewed, and a structural analysis technique using the finite element force method based on the complementary strain energy is proposed. Similar to the standard force and the integrated force methods, the force method based on the complementary strain energy uses the same equilibrium equations. However, the compatibility conditions are satisfied through the complementary strain energy. The Gauss elimination technique has been employed successfully to generate automatically a basis determinate structure and redundant members. Extension of the force method to dynamics and benchmark problems with displacement-stress and frequency constraints are presented.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.876
Threshold uncertainty score0.584

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.222 · 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