MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2939048528 · doi:10.1142/s1756973719500021

Modeling of Cementitious Representative Volume Element with Various Water–Cement Ratios

2019· article· en· W2939048528 on OpenAlexaff
M. M. Shahzamanian, Wan Jeffrey Basirun

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Multiscale Modelling · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComposite Material Mechanics
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepresentative elementary volumeHomogenization (climate)Materials scienceFinite element methodCementitiousPoisson's ratioBoundary value problemShear modulusElastic modulusCementComposite materialMicrostructureStructural engineeringPoisson distributionMathematical analysisMathematicsEngineeringStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study uses the finite element method (FEM) to measure the mechanical properties of microstructure-based cementitious representative volume elements (RVEs) with various water–cement ratios (W/Cs) generated by CEMHYD3D. The finite element boundary condition effects that significantly and computationally change the elastic properties are studied and discussed. Various boundary conditions in ABAQUS are applied and compared with the results obtained using the variational asymptotic method for unit cell homogenization (VAMUCH). This comparison is conducted using ANSYS. This study aims to analyze and determine the effect of different boundary conditions in detail on the prediction of the elastic properties of cementitious RVE with various W/Cs and identify the best approach in this regard. Results show that Young’s, shear, and bulk moduli decrease with the increase in W/C and the boundary conditions in ABAQUS influence the outcomes, particularly on bulk modulus and Poisson’s ratio.

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

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Multiscale ModellingSame topicComposite Material MechanicsFrench-language works237,207