MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2283812666

MODIFIED FIXED-GRID FINITE ELEMENT METHOD IN SHAPE OPTIMIZATION PROBLEMS BASED ON THE GRADIENTLESS METHOD

2014· article· en· W2283812666 on OpenAlexaff
M Heshmatia, Farhang Daneshmand, Y. Amini

Bibliographic record

VenueScientia Iranica · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTopology Optimization in Engineering
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinite element methodGridStiffness matrixShape optimizationMinificationBoundary (topology)Mixed finite element methodMathematical optimizationComputer scienceBoundary knot methodExtended finite element methodMesh generationMatrix (chemical analysis)Method of fundamental solutionsAlgorithmMathematicsBoundary element methodGeometryMathematical analysisStructural engineeringEngineeringMaterials science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a methodology for solving shape optimization problemswhere the unknown is the shape of the problem domain. The proposed algorithm is based on the minimization of the stress along design boundary calculated by the Modified Fixed Grid Finite Element Method (MFGFEM). Using MFGFEM eliminates mesh adaptation and re-meshing processes as needed in the standard finite element method and reduces the analysis cost significantly. In this study, a new approach for computing stiffness matrix of boundary intersecting elements is also presented and optimal shape of the problem domain is obtained via a simple optimization algorithm.The performance of the proposed approach is investigated for the shape optimization problems. It is concluded that the results of the present method are in a good agreement with other analytical and finite element solutions.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.229 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientia IranicaSame topicTopology Optimization in EngineeringFrench-language works237,207