MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3089807314 · doi:10.3390/ma13194333

Transient Effects of Applying and Removing Strain on the Mechanical Behavior of Rubber

2020· article· en· W3089807314 on OpenAlexaff
Elli Gkouti, Burak Yenigün, Aleksander Czekanski

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPolymer Nanocomposites and Properties
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsViscoelasticityCreepMaterials scienceStress relaxationStrain (injury)Relaxation (psychology)Stress (linguistics)Work (physics)Natural rubberComposite materialTransient (computer programming)Transient responseComputer scienceMechanical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For viscoelastic materials, the relationship between stress and strain depends on time, where the applied strain (or stress) can be expressed as a step function of time. In the present work, we investigated two temporary effects in the response of viscoelastic materials when a given strain is applied and then removed. The application of strain causes a stress response over time, also known as relaxation. By contrast, recovery is the response that occurs following the removal of an applied stress or strain. Both stress and relaxation constitute transient stages of a viscoelastic material exposed to a permanent force. In the current work, we performed several experimental tests to record the recovery in response to the total or partial removal of the strain. By observing and analyzing the mechanical response of the material to strain, we deduced that recovery is a procedure not only related to creep but also to relaxation. Hence, we created a model that simulates the behavior of viscoelastic materials, contributing to the prediction of relevant results concerning different 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.277

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterialsSame topicPolymer Nanocomposites and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207