Two interacting non-elliptical rigid harmonic inclusions loaded by couples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We use conformal mapping techniques to design two interacting non-elliptical rigid inclusions, each of which is loaded by a couple, which ensure the so-called ?harmonic condition? in which the original mean stress in the matrix remains undisturbed after the introduction of the inclusions. We show that for prescribed Poisson?s ratio and corresponding geometric parameters, several restrictions are necessary on the external loadings to ensure the harmonic condition. It is seen from our analysis that: (i) the interfacial and hoop stresses are uniformly distributed along each of the inclusion-matrix interfaces; (ii) the interfacial normal and hoop stresses along the two interfaces are completely determined by the Poisson?s ratio and the constant mean stress in the matrix whilst the interfacial tangential stress along the two interfaces can be completely determined by the moments of the couples and the areas of the two inclusions; (iii) the existence of the applied couples will influence the non-elliptical shapes of the two rigid harmonic inclusions when the moment to area ratios for the two inclusions differ.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".