Ideal Strength of Methane Hydrate and Ice I<sub>h</sub> from First-Principles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ideal strength of methane hydrate and ice I h was investigated and quantified from first-principles calculations. Using density functional theory, methane hydrate was studied under uniaxial, triaxial, and shear deformation modes, and the uniaxial deformation of ice I h was considered for comparison. The resulting ideal strength was found, and the structural evolution in terms of bond lengths, bond angles, elastic moduli, and Poisson ratio was analyzed throughout the deformation. It was found that methane hydrate displays brittle behavior in terms of its strength and has no dominant slip system. Ice I h exhibited a higher ideal uniaxial strength compared to the hydrate by deviating from the perfect tetrahedral arrangement of its water molecules. Under uniaxial tension, both structures maintain their transverse isotropy and fail at a critical hydrogen bond length despite the difference in their strength values. Under uniaxial compression, however, the hydrate loses its transverse isotropy unlike ice I h which maintains it. While ice I h and hydrates are similar in many of their physical properties, their ideal strength and structural deformation were found to be different. The presented new monocrystal mechanical properties and insights are a guide to future research in natural and synthetic polycrystalline gas hydrates.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".