MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166238617 · doi:10.1002/nag.975

Diffuse failure in geomaterials: Experiments, theory and modelling

2010· article· en· W2166238617 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ali Daouadji, Félix Darve, H. Al Gali, P. Y. Hicher, Farid Laouafa, S. Lignon, François Nicot, Roberto Nova, Maurício Canêdo Pinheiro, Florent Prunier, Luc Sibille, Richard Wan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRock Mechanics and Modeling
Canadian institutionsGovernment of CanadaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeomechanicsWork (physics)Stress spaceDomain (mathematical analysis)BifurcationCharacter (mathematics)Statistical physicsConstitutive equationAssociative propertyOrder (exchange)Basis (linear algebra)Computer scienceStructural engineeringMathematicsGeotechnical engineeringEngineeringMechanical engineeringPhysicsFinite element methodNonlinear systemMathematical analysisGeometryEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper presents a synthesis of the works performed by various teams from France, Italy and Canada around the question of second‐order work criterion. Because of the non‐associative character of geomaterials plastic strains, it is now recognized that a whole bifurcation domain exists in the stress space with various possible modes of failure. In a first part these failure modes are observed in lab experimental tests and in discrete element modelling. Then a theoretical study of second‐order work allows to establish a link with the kinetic energy, giving a basis to explain the transition from a prefailure (quasi)static regime to a postfailure dynamic regime. Eventually the main features of geomaterials failure are obtained by applying second‐order work criterion to five different constitutive rate‐independent models—three being phenomenological and two micromechanical. As a whole this paper tries to gather together all the elements for a proper understanding and use of second‐order work criterion in geomechanics. Copyright © 2010 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.328 · 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

Citations105
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in GeomechanicsSame topicRock Mechanics and ModelingFrench-language works237,207