MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3199029053 · doi:10.1002/nme.6834

Stabilization of the extended finite element method for stiff embedded interfaces and inclusions

2021· article· en· W3199029053 on OpenAlexaff
R. Emre Erkmen, Daniel Dias‐da‐Costa

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNumerical methods in engineering
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExtended finite element methodHomogenization (climate)Finite element methodClassification of discontinuitiesDiscontinuity (linguistics)OrthogonalityBoundary value problemMethod of mean weighted residualsMathematicsMathematical analysisStructural engineeringApplied mathematicsGalerkin methodGeometryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article investigates the performance of the XFEM for stiff embedded interfaces and inclusions. It is known that the XFEM may lead to ill‐conditioned stiffness matrices and oscillations in the interface traction field, the severity of which depends on the underlying basis functions, as well as on the orientation of the interface. The jumps at the discontinuity are shown to contain quadratic bubble residuals that can introduce oscillatory behavior. Those residuals are worsened by the ill‐conditioning of the system with very stiff interfaces. A variationally consistent method is proposed to overcome the oscillatory behavior and ill‐conditioning, in which the assumed strain method is developed to directly eliminate bubble residuals and deploy Legendre polynomials and explore their orthogonality properties to improve the conditioning of the stiffness matrices. Numerical examples illustrate the efficiency and generality of the proposed approach at both element and structural levels. The new approach is shown to be robust for imposing Dirichlet type boundary conditions at the crack interface, such as crack closure and initially rigid cohesive laws. The effects of numerical oscillations on the prediction of effective properties of composites in XFEM‐based computational homogenization procedures are also discussed.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.367 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Numerical Methods in EngineeringSame topicNumerical methods in engineeringFrench-language works237,207