MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062771488 · doi:10.1115/1.4007288

Comparison of Elastic and Plastic Reference Volume Approaches

2012· article· en· W2062771488 on OpenAlexaff
P. S. Reddy Gudimetla

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pressure Vessel Technology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVolume (thermodynamics)Limit (mathematics)Limit loadTangentMathematicsFinite element methodNonlinear systemMultiplier (economics)Mathematical analysisStructural engineeringGeometryThermodynamicsEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For finding out reliable limit load multipliers in pressure vessel components or structures using simplified limit load methods, proper estimation of reference volume is important. In this paper, two empirical methods namely elastic reference volume method (ERVM) and plastic reference volume method (PRVM) for reference volume correction are presented and compared. These reference volume correction concepts are used in combination with mα-tangent method and elastic modulus adjustment procedure to achieve converged limit load multiplier solution. These multipliers are compared with nonlinear finite element analysis results and are found to be lower bounded. Elastic reference volume method is the simplest method for reference volume correction when compared to plastic reference volume method.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.166
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pressure Vessel TechnologySame topicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering DesignFrench-language works237,207