Corrugation Reinforced Composites: A Method for Filling Holes in Material‐Property Space
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Material‐property space is filled with holes representing desirable combinations of properties, such as high strength and high necking strain. One way to fill those holes is to use architectured materials. In this work, Finite Element Modeling (FEM) simulations are performed to evaluate composites with a corrugated reinforcement architecture across a range of volume fractions and corrugation heights for a model copper‐steel system. The corrugated reinforcement geometry shows large improvements in necking strain, which increases with corrugation height, without sacrificing strength, and fills a desirable region in material‐property space. Additionally, it is found that the necking strain of a matrix material can be increased by adding a less ductile reinforcing material provided it has a highly corrugated geometry. The improvement in necking strain seen in these composites is attributed to a boost in work hardening that results from an evolving reinforcement alignment as the corrugation unbends.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it