MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114675462 · doi:10.1002/pen.20814

Application of essential work of fracture concept to toughness characterization of high‐density polyethylene

2007· article· en· W2114675462 on OpenAlexaff
Hyock‐Ju Kwon, P.‐Y. Ben Jar

Bibliographic record

VenuePolymer Engineering and Science · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Behavior of Composites
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeckingMaterials scienceHigh-density polyethyleneFracture toughnessComposite materialDeformation (meteorology)Ultimate tensile strengthToughnessTensile testingPolyethyleneFracture (geology)Characterization (materials science)Plane stressStress (linguistics)Work (physics)Structural engineeringFinite element methodMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Deformation and fracture toughness of high‐density polyethylene (HDPE) in plane‐stress tension was studied using the concept of essential work of fracture (EWF). Strain range for necking was determined from uniaxial tensile test, and was used to explain the deformation transition for 2‐staged crack growth in double‐edge‐notched tensile test. Through work‐partitioning, EWF values for HDPE were determined for each stage of the crack growth. Appropriateness of these EWF values to represent the material toughness is discussed. The study concludes that the EWF values for ductile polymers like HDPE may not be constant, but vary with the deformation behaviour involved in the crack growth process. POLYM. ENG. SCI., 47:1327–1337, 2007. © 2007 Society of Plastics Engineers

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations24
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolymer Engineering and ScienceSame topicMechanical Behavior of CompositesFrench-language works237,207