Vibration and buckling analysis of a piezoelectric nanoplate considering surface effects and in-plane constraints
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work investigates the surface effects on the vibration and buckling behaviour of a simply supported piezoelectric nanoplate (PNP) by using a modified Kirchhoff plate model. Two kinds of in-plane constraints are defined for the PNP, and the surface effects are accounted in the modified plate theory through the surface piezoelectricity model and the generalized Young–Laplace equations. Simulation results show that the influence of surface effects on the plate resonant frequency depends on the in-plane constraints significantly. For the PNP with different in-plane constraints, the effects of the applied electric potential, the mode number, the plate aspect ratio and the plate thickness on the resonant frequency are examined with consideration of the surface effects. The possible mechanical buckling of the PNP is also studied, and it is found that the surface effects on the critical electric voltage for buckling are sensitive to the plate thickness and aspect ratio. Our results also reveal that there exists a critical transition point at which the combined surface effects on the critical electric voltage may vanish under certain conditions.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".