MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2737045041 · doi:10.1177/1056789517720804

A damage model for modeling the complete stress–strain relations of brittle rocks under uniaxial compression

2017· article· en· W2737045041 on OpenAlexaff
Dongqiao Liu, Manchao He, Ming Cai

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Damage Mechanics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRock Mechanics and Modeling
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUniaxial tensionCompression (physics)BrittlenessDeformation (meteorology)Materials scienceElastic modulusRock mechanicsGeotechnical engineeringModulusTest dataConstitutive equationStress–strain curveStress (linguistics)MechanicsGeologyStructural engineeringComposite materialEngineeringPhysicsFinite element methodUltimate tensile strength

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Based on the “elastic modulus method” derived from the hypothesis of strain equivalence and test data of complete stress–strain curves of marble, granite, and sandstone under uniaxial compression, a damage model in the form of Logistic equation is proposed to simulate the stress–strain relation of rocks. This model can describe the complete deformation process of rocks under uniaxial compression satisfactorily. The used mathematical function is simple with just four model parameters, and each parameter has distinct physical meaning. The validity of the model is demonstrated by a mathematical deduction analysis and the model is further verified using laboratory test data. In addition, this model provides a method for estimating the elastic modulus of undamaged rocks using uniaxial compression test results and it presents a reasonable explanation of the chaos phenomenon occurred in uniaxial compression test.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations119
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Damage MechanicsSame topicRock Mechanics and ModelingFrench-language works237,207