Atomistic and continuum modelling of stress field at an inhomogeneity in graphene
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The influence of an atomic inhomogeneity on the resulting stress field of a nanoscopic matrix material can be remarkably different from the corresponding continuum descriptions due to the significance of surface energy and the discrete nature of matter at the nanoscale . In this work, we conducted a comprehensive molecular dynamics study to investigate the stress field at an atomic inhomogeneity, in the form of an elliptical hole or a circular hexagonal boron-nitride inclusion, in graphene. The results show that stress concentration factor at an inhomogeneity is higher than the corresponding classical continuum solution. We estimated the surface elastic constants for a modified continuum framework using the molecular dynamics results. Comparison between the atomic simulations and the modified continuum model reveals the limitations of such continuum-based models for the two-dimensional materials. Molecular dynamics results imply that the underlying atomic structure softens the effect of inhomogeneity compared to a continuum description thus causing an amplification of the stress filed. The molecular dynamics and modified continuum solutions for stress concentration are presented in simplified forms and design charts to facilitate preliminary design of graphene-based hybrid materials .
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".