Apparent fracture/adhesion energy of interfaces with periodic cohesive interactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The apparent fracture/adhesion energy of an interface with periodic cohesive interactions is of general interest to understanding adhesion via periodic adhesion patches (e.g. between micro- and nanostructured surfaces). There are two important length scales for this class of problems: one corresponds to the period of cohesive interaction and the other is the size of the cohesive zone near the tip of a crack along the interface. By theoretical considerations and numerical simulations, we show that the apparent fracture/adhesion energy depends on the ratio between the period of cohesive interaction and the cohesive zone size: it is equal to the average cohesive energy of the interface if the former is much smaller than the latter but becomes the peak value of the local cohesive energy when the opposite is true. This prediction has been confirmed by numerical simulations on the peeling of a thin-film/strip adhering on a substrate via periodic discrete adhesion patches. Our analysis also provides explanations for a recent molecular dynamics simulation which showed that the apparent adhesion energy of a single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) adhering on a graphite sheet is equal to the peak, rather than the average, value of the van der Waals interaction energy between the ssDNA and the substrate.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".