MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3043552815 · doi:10.1115/hvis2019-022

Bulking as a Mechanism in the Failure of Advanced Ceramics

2019· article· en· W3043552815 on OpenAlexaff
Brendan Koch, Calvin Lo, Tomoko Sano, James D. Hogan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRock Mechanics and Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrittlenessCeramicMaterials scienceDigital image correlationsortFracture (geology)Mechanism (biology)Failure mechanismProcess (computing)Brittle fractureFracture mechanicsStress (linguistics)Computer scienceForensic engineeringComposite materialEngineeringDatabasePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Failure in brittle materials is characterized by crack growth and fracture, processes which involve an increase in the volume of a sample to accommodate these cracks. This process is called bulking and it is known to be an important factor in the failure of materials such as ceramics, stone, and concrete. While volumetric strains are obtainable under quasi-static conditions, under dynamic conditions technical challenges have stood in the way of obtaining multi-dimensional strain data that would allow for assessment of bulking under the sort loading conditions that would simulate a high velocity impact. Advances in digital-image-correlation and ultra-high-speed-photography have however opened up the capacity to obtain this higher dimensional data. This data in turn has prompted an assessment of prior theory to produce a framework through which stress-strain behavior can be expressed in terms of changes to multiple elastic constants simultaneously. This presentation offers initial results in quasi-static and dynamic experiments and discusses the implications for brittle material behavior and crack evolution phenomenon under a variety of conditions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRock Mechanics and ModelingFrench-language works237,207