MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065351994 · doi:10.1115/imece2014-37986

Nonlinear Vibration of Nanobeam With Quadratic Rational Bezier Arc Curvature

2014· article· en· W2065351994 on OpenAlexafffund
H.R. Askari, Zia Saadatnia, Ebrahim Esmailzadeh

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced machining processes and optimization
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCurvatureNonlinear systemMathematical analysisVibrationNatural frequencyMathematicsGalerkin methodBoundary value problemArc lengthClassical mechanicsPhysicsGeometryArc (geometry)Acoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nonlinear vibration of nanobeam with the quadratic rational Bezier arc curvature is investigated. The governing equation of motion of the nanobeam based on the Euler-Bernoulli beam theory is developed. Accordingly, the non-uniform rational B-spline (NURBS) is implemented in order to write the implicit form of the governing equation of the structure. The simply-supported boundary conditions are assumed and the Galerkin procedure is utilized to find the nonlinear ordinary differential equation of the system. The nonlinear natural frequency of the system is found and the effects of different parameters, namely, the waviness amplitude, oscillation amplitude, aspect ratio, curvature shape and the Pasternak foundation coefficient are fully investigated. The hardening and softening responses of the natural frequency of structure are detected for variations of the shape and amplitude of the curvature waviness. It is revealed that the ratio of nonlinear to linear frequency increases with an increase in the oscillation amplitudes. It is found that by increasing the Pasternak foundation coefficient, the ratio of nonlinear to linear frequency decreases.

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 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 score0.760
Threshold uncertainty score0.228

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced machining processes and optimizationFrench-language works237,207