MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2216581574 · doi:10.3968/7703

Damage Constitutive Model of Mudstone Creep Based on the Theory of Fractional Calculus

2015· article· en· W2216581574 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jia Zeng, Jun Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in petroleum exploration and development · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRock Mechanics and Modeling
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreepConstitutive equationFractional calculusGeotechnical engineeringStress (linguistics)Materials scienceExponential functionDamage mechanicsMechanicsNonlinear systemGeologyStructural engineeringMathematicsComposite materialMathematical analysisEngineeringFinite element methodPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When swelling mudstone, its various mechanical parameters will change significantly. Establish mudstone’s fractional calculus creep damage model structure diagram, which describe the extent of damage in rock damage variable. Assumed that the stress level of rock exceeded its the long-term strength and under the condition of mudstone accelerated strain rate loading, nonlinear damage model based on fractional calculus theory was established. Therefore mudstone creep constitutive model considering the accelerated strain rate loading conditions was obtained. The results of constitutive model showed that there appears to be an exponential function between strain and time in the accelerated creep stage. The creep test data were used to verify the proposed model and the results suggested that the fractional order b was the intrinsic parameters of rock mass which could reflect its hardness. During the accelerated creep stage, fractional creep damage constitutive model could describe the stress-strain relationship well.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in petroleum exploration and developmentSame topicRock Mechanics and ModelingFrench-language works237,207