MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161505541 · doi:10.1115/1.2189873

A Discrete Quasi-Coordinate Formulation for the Dynamics of Elastic Bodies

2006· article· en· W2161505541 on OpenAlexaff
G.M.T. D’Eleuterio, Timothy D. Barfoot

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Mechanics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDynamics and Control of Mechanical Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiscretizationInertial frame of referenceDisplacement (psychology)Classical mechanicsEquations of motionRigid bodyCoordinate systemMultibody systemGeneralized coordinatesDynamics (music)Spherical coordinate systemFinite element methodMathematical analysisMathematicsPhysicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The discretized equations of motion for elastic systems are typically displayed in second-order form. That is, the elastic displacements are represented by a set of discretized (generalized) coordinates, such as those used in a finite-element method, and the elastic rates are simply taken to be the time-derivatives of these displacements. Unfortunately, this approach leads to unpleasant and computationally intensive inertial terms when rigid rotations of a body must be taken into account, as is so often the case in multibody dynamics. An alternative approach, presented here, assumes the elastic rates to be discretized independently of the elastic displacements. The resulting dynamical equations of motion are simplified in form, and the computational cost is correspondingly lessened. However, a slightly more complex kinematical relation between the rate coordinates and the displacement coordinates is required. This tack leads to what may be described as a discrete quasi-coordinate formulation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations13
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied MechanicsSame topicDynamics and Control of Mechanical SystemsFrench-language works237,207