MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124178251 · doi:10.1177/1081286509352836

Eshelby’s Problem for a Bonded Piezo-elastic Bimaterial

2009· article· en· W2124178251 on OpenAlexaff
L. J. Sudak

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematics and Mechanics of Solids · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNumerical methods in engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIsotropyConformal mapPiezoelectricityInclusion (mineral)Mathematical analysisStress (linguistics)Plane (geometry)MathematicsPhysicsMaterials scienceGeometryComposite materialOpticsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A general method is presented for the analytic solution of Eshelby’s problem concerned with a smooth inclusion of arbitrary shape embedded within the elastic half-plane of a bonded piezoelectric—elastic bimaterial. Since the well-known Stroh formulation, on which almost all existing works on Eshelby’s problem in piezoelectric media has been based, breaks down for isotropic elastic materials, the solutions available in the literature cannot be applied directly. Consequently, the method of solution for the current problem involves a combination of Stroh’s formulation for piezoelectric materials and the well-known Muskhelishvili method for isotropic elastic bodies. The general solution is derived in terms of an auxiliary function which can be constructed using conformal mappings that map the exterior of the inclusion onto the exterior of the unit circle. To illustrate the method, the case of a dilatational inclusion is examined and detailed results are shown for the mean stress within a thermal elliptic inclusion.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematics and Mechanics of SolidsSame topicNumerical methods in engineeringFrench-language works237,207