MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167848526 · doi:10.1115/1.4004323

Free Vibration of Single Layer Graphene Sheets: Lattice Structure Versus Continuum Plate Theories

2011· article· en· W2167848526 on OpenAlexaff
S. Arghavan, Atul Vir Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nanotechnology in Engineering and Medicine · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCarbon Nanotubes in Composites
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrapheneMaterials scienceCarbon nanotubeFinite element methodLattice (music)Normal modeStiffnessVibrationComposite materialPhysicsNanotechnologyThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prospect of applications of graphene sheets in composites and other advanced materials have drawn attention from a broad spectrum of research fields. This paper deals with the methods to find mechanical properties of such nanoscale structures. First, the lattice structure method with the Poisson’s ratio of 0.16 and the thickness of 3.4 Å is used to obtain the Young’s moduli for the in-plane and out-of-plane deformation states. This method has the accuracy of molecular dynamics simulations and efficiency of the finite element method. The graphene sheet is modeled as a plane grid of carbon atoms taken as the nodal points, each of which carries the mass of the carbon atom and is assigned as a six degrees of freedom. The covalent bond between two adjacent carbon atoms is treated as an extremely stiff frame element with all three axial, bending, and torsional stiffness components. Subsequently, the computed Young’s moduli, approximately 0.11 TPa for bending and 1.04 TPa for the in-plane condition, are used for studying the vibrational behaviors of graphene sheets by the continuum plate theory. The natural frequencies and corresponding mode shapes of various shaped single layer graphene sheet ), such as rectangular, skewed, and circular, are computed by the two methods which are found to yield very close results. Results of the well-established continuum plate theory are very consistent with the lattice structure method, which is based on accurate interatomic forces.

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)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations18
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nanotechnology in Engineering and MedicineSame topicCarbon Nanotubes in CompositesFrench-language works237,207