MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154003803 · doi:10.1002/nme.2745

A continuum‐to‐atomistic bridging domain method for composite lattices

2009· article· en· W2154003803 on OpenAlexaff
Mei Xu, Robert Gracie, Ted Belytschko

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNumerical methods in engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersArmy Research OfficeOffice of Naval Research
KeywordsBridging (networking)Lagrange multiplierCompatibility (geochemistry)Lattice (music)Domain decomposition methodsDisplacement fieldComposite numberStatistical physicsInternal energyCoupling (piping)PhysicsMathematicsFinite element methodClassical mechanicsMathematical analysisComputer scienceMaterials scienceAlgorithmQuantum mechanicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The bridging domain method is an overlapping domain decomposition approach for coupling finite element continuum models and molecular mechanics models. In this method, the total energy is decomposed into atomistic and continuum parts by complementary weight functions applied to each part of the energy in the coupling domain. To enforce compatibility, the motions of the coupled atoms are constrained by the continuum displacement field using Lagrange multipliers. For composite lattices, this approach is suboptimal because the internal modes of the lattice are suppressed by the homogeneous continuum displacement field in the coupling region. To overcome this difficulty, we present a relaxed bridging domain method. In this method, the atom set is divided into primary and secondary atoms; the relative motions between them are often called the internal modes. Only the primary atoms are constrained in the coupling region, which succeed in allowing these internal modes to fully relax. Several one‐ and two‐dimensional examples are presented, which demonstrate improved accuracy over the standard bridging domain method. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.380 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations32
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Numerical Methods in EngineeringSame topicNumerical methods in engineeringFrench-language works237,207