MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032736972 · doi:10.1093/qjmam/54.3.449

A Circular Inclusion with Circumferentially Inhomogeneous Non-Slip Interface in Plane Elasticity

2001· article· en· W2032736972 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Quarterly Journal of Mechanics and Applied Mathematics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicContact Mechanics and Variational Inequalities
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMathematical analysisJumpBoundary value problemSlip (aerodynamics)MathematicsTraction (geology)Elasticity (physics)GeometryHomogeneousAnalytic functionExact solutions in general relativityPhysicsMechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A rigorous solution is presented for a problem associated with a circular inclusion embedded within an infinite matrix in plane elastostatics. The bonding at the inclusion–matrix interface is assumed to be imperfect. Specifically, the jump in the normal displacement is assumed to be proportional to the normal traction with the proportionality parameter taken to be circumferentially inhomogeneous. In addition, we assume that displacements in the tangential direction are continuous. This type of interface is generally referred to as an inhomogeneous non‐slip interface. Using the principle of analytic continuation, the basic boundary‐value problem for four analytic functions is reduced to a first‐order differential equation for a single analytic function defined inside the circular inclusion. The resulting closed‐form solutions include a finite number of unknown constants determined by analyticity requirements and certain other supplementary conditions. The method is illustrated using several specific examples of a particular class of inhomogeneous non‐slip interface. The results from these calculations are compared with the corresponding results when the interface imperfections are homogeneous. These comparisons indicate that the circumferential variation of interface damage has a significant effect on even the average stresses induced within a circular inclusion.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.719
Threshold uncertainty score0.438

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.214 · 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