Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work is aimed at emphasising the relationship between metric and deformation, under the light of a novel formalism for the Polar Decomposition Theorem. All results are first presented in the classical formalism of Cauchy’s celebrated theorem, and then in the proposed alternative formalism. Although the latter requires a little more work to be established, it allows for directly defining all strain tensors as “covariant”, i.e. with both feet being covectors. Emphasis is also placed on how, in the absence of the metric structure, the available mathematical tools are restricted to the deformation gradient alone. Along with these main results, and in the didactical intention that permeates this work, several hints are given, which could be useful in teaching Continuum Mechanics, e.g. the rigorous definition of the determinant of the deformation gradient in Riemannian manifolds, and a caveat on the definition of the spatial Hencky logarithmic strain. The setting is that of modern Continuum Mechanics, based on the description given by Differential Geometry in terms of differentiable manifolds. However, passing to the simpler case of affine spaces takes almost no effort, paying attention to keeping the distinction between vectors and covectors, and therefore allowing the matrices representing the metric tensors to differ from the unit matrix.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.005 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".