MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074411282 · doi:10.1177/0021998309351605

Progressive Fatigue Damage Modeling of Cross-ply Laminates, II: Experimental Evaluation

2009· article· en· W2074411282 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Composite Materials · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Behavior of Composites
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceCross plyComposite materialComposite laminatesTransfer moldingComposite numberMolding (decorative)Structural engineeringMold

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents the results of an experimental investigation of static and fatigue behavior of unidirectional and cross-ply T700/Cycom 890 composite laminates. Test specimens are fabricated by using vacuum-assisted resin transfer molding technique. The ply configurations are: unidirectional [0 10 ] and [90 10 ] and cross-ply ([0/90] 4s , [0/90 5 /0], and [0/90 4 ] s ) composites. Unidirectional specimens are tested under static and fatigue conditions to provide fundamental input data to run the progressive fatigue damage model developed in the first part of this article. To evaluate the capability of the progressive fatigue damage model, cross-ply laminates are tested under static and fatigue loading. The comparison between model predictions and the experiments shows a good correlation.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.727

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.303 · 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