Topological complexity of frictional interfaces: friction networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Through research conducted in this study, a network approach to the correlation patterns of void spaces in rough fractures (crack type II) was developed. We characterized friction networks with several networks characteristics. The correlation among network properties with the fracture permeability is the result of friction networks. The revealed hubs in the complex aperture networks confirmed the importance of highly correlated groups to conduct the highlighted features of the dynamical aperture field. We found that there is a universal power law between the nodes' degree and motifs frequency (for triangles it reads T(k) ∝ kβ (β ≈ 2 ± 0.3)). The investigation of localization effects on eigenvectors shows a remarkable difference in parallel and perpendicular aperture patches. Furthermore, we estimate the rate of stored energy in asperities so that we found that the rate of radiated energy is higher in parallel friction networks than it is in transverse directions. The final part of our research highlights 4 point sub-graph distribution and its correlation with fluid flow. For shear rupture, we observed a similar trend in sub-graph distribution, resulting from parallel and transversal aperture profiles (a superfamily phenomenon).
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".