In-plane compression behavior of anti-tetrachiral and re-entrant lattices
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
Abstract In the present study, a comparative compression investigation of anti-tetrachiral and modified re-entrant lattices was conducted in-plane direction using experimental and numerical analyses. Lattice structures were manufactured using fused deposition modelling 3D printing technology and crushed at quasi-static condition. Nonlinear finite element (FE) models of both structures were established, and the FE results were systematically compared with the experimental results. The onset of densification phases of both structures was determined numerically. Results indicate that deformation modes strongly affect the force-deflection response of both designs. In this manner, failure locations and buckling deformation in the tests were identified to find a relation with theory and to modify geometries. The anti-tetrachiral design exhibits higher specific energy absorption than modified re-entrant hexagonal lattices. Beyond the auxetic characteristics, deformation mechanism of the anti-tetrachiral lattices provides an opportunity to construct excellent crush absorption in-plane direction thanks to its high shear strength stem from its unique deformation mechanism.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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