MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802482964 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2000-0010

A FINITE AMPLITUDE WAVE PROPAGATION PROBLEM FOR A PSEUDO-ELASTIC SOLID

2000· article· en· W2802482964 on OpenAlexaffvenue
J. B. Haddow, Lei Jiang

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElasticity and Material Modeling
Canadian institutionsMartec (Canada)University of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHyperelastic materialFinite strain theoryIsotropic solidIsotropyCompressibilityStrain energyAmplitudeElastic energyStrain energy density functionStress (linguistics)Deformation (meteorology)Materials scienceCauchy stress tensorMechanicsPhysicsClassical mechanicsFinite element methodComposite materialThermodynamicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A constitutive model for an incompressible pseudo-elastic rubberlike solid is proposed. The term pseudo-elastic refers to a solid which has different stress-deformation relations for loading and unloading so that a hysteresis effect is exhibited, and the virgin reference configuration is recovered when the solid is unloaded. The model is based on an isotropic hyperelastic strain energy function W(F), where F is the deformation gradient tensor and det[F] = 1, and the stress-deformation relation for loading from an unstressed state is the same as that for a hyperelastic solid with strain energy function W(F). Loading (unloading) is assumed to occur when dW(F) > 0 (dW(F) < 0) and neutral loading when dW(F) = 0. Finite amplitude wave propagation in a semi-infinite pseudo-elastic string, which is subjected to a cycle of tensile loading and unloading at the free end is considered. Numerical results, obtained from an adaptation of the method of characteristics, are presented for a particular form of the proposed model, which is based on the Mooney-Rivlin strain energy function.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.939
Threshold uncertainty score0.570

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicElasticity and Material ModelingFrench-language works237,207