MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2800814877 · doi:10.1002/nme.5819

A continuation method for rigid‐cohesive fracture in a discontinuous Galerkin finite element setting

2018· article· en· W2800814877 on OpenAlexafffund
M. Reza Hirmand, Katerina D. Papoulia

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNumerical methods in engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFinite element methodDiscontinuous Galerkin methodDiscretizationMathematicsRobustness (evolution)Lagrange multiplierMinificationApplied mathematicsEnergy minimizationPenalty methodMathematical optimizationExtended finite element methodQuasistatic processMixed finite element methodGalerkin methodWeak formulationMathematical analysisBoundary value problemStructural engineeringEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary An energy minimization formulation of initially rigid cohesive fracture is introduced within a discontinuous Galerkin finite element setting with Nitsche flux. The finite element discretization is directly applied to an energy functional, whose term representing the energy stored in the interfaces is nondifferentiable at the origin. Unlike finite element implementations of extrinsic cohesive models that do not operate directly on the energy potential, activation of interfaces happens automatically when a certain level of stress encoded in the interface potential is reached. Thus, numerical issues associated with an external activation criterion observed in the previous literature are effectively avoided. Use of the Nitsche flux avoids the introduction of Lagrange multipliers as additional unknowns. Implicit time stepping is performed using the Newmark scheme, for which a dynamic potential is developed to properly incorporate momentum. A continuation strategy is employed for the treatment of nondifferentiability and the resulting sequence of smooth nonconvex problems is solved using the trust region minimization algorithm. Robustness of the proposed method and its capabilities in modeling quasistatic and dynamic problems are shown through several numerical examples.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.373 · 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

Citations30
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Numerical Methods in EngineeringSame topicNumerical methods in engineeringFrench-language works237,207