MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150818607 · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139016063

Damage and Failure of Composite Materials

2012· book· en· W2150818607 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

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2012
Typebook
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMaterial Properties and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComposite numberMaterials scienceDamage mechanicsStructural engineeringBucklingMaterial failure theoryComposite materialDamage toleranceBreakageCeramic matrix compositeEngineeringFinite element method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding damage and failure of composite materials is critical for reliable and cost-effective engineering design. Bringing together materials mechanics and modeling, this book provides a complete guide to damage, fatigue and failure of composite materials. Early chapters focus on the underlying principles governing composite damage, reviewing basic equations and mechanics theory, before describing mechanisms of damage such as cracking, breakage and buckling. In subsequent chapters, the physical mechanisms underlying the formation and progression of damage under mechanical loads are described with ample experimental data, and micro- and macro-level damage models are combined. Finally, fatigue of composite materials is discussed using fatigue-life diagrams. While there is a special emphasis on polymer matrix composites, metal and ceramic matrix composites are also described. Outlining methods for more reliable design of composite structures, this is a valuable resource for engineers and materials scientists in industry and academia.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.610
Threshold uncertainty score0.970

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.175 · 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