MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3101934687 · doi:10.5267/j.esm.2020.5.005

Methods of influence coefficients to evaluate stress and deviation distributions of parts under operating conditions - A review

2020· review· en· W3101934687 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Andrea Corrado, Wilma Polini

Bibliographic record

VenueEngineering Solid Mechanics · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced machining processes and optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStress (linguistics)Materials scienceMechanicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The most used approach to solve tolerance analysis problems for flexible products is the method of influence coefficients that combines the finite element analysis with statistical analysis in order to establish a relationship between the product deviation and part deviation and to foresee the statistical distribution of stresses.The key of this relationship is the sensitivity matrix for the deviations and stresses that can be evaluated by different methods of influence coefficients.Therefore, the aim of this work is to make a review of these methods applying them to evaluate on some single parts the statistical distribution of deviations and stresses due to operating conditions, i.e. due to the displacements applied to the part during its working.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.453
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.351 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEngineering Solid MechanicsSame topicAdvanced machining processes and optimizationFrench-language works237,207