MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3201884713 · doi:10.1093/jcde/qwab051

A novel lattice structure topology optimization method with extreme anisotropic lattice properties

2021· article· en· W3201884713 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computational Design and Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTopology Optimization in Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Shandong ProvinceNatural Science Foundation of Jiangsu ProvinceShandong University
KeywordsTopology optimizationLattice (music)Topology (electrical circuits)Homogenization (climate)MathematicsAnisotropyMathematical optimizationComputer scienceStructural engineeringFinite element methodPhysicsEngineeringCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This research presents a lattice structure topology optimization (LSTO) method that significantly expands the design space by creating a novel candidate lattice that assesses an extremely large range of effective material properties. About the details, topology optimization is employed to design lattices with extreme directional tensile or shear properties subject to different volume fraction limits and the optimized lattices are categorized into groups according to their dominating properties. The novel candidate lattice is developed by combining the optimized elementary lattices, by picking up one from each group, and then parametrized with the elementary lattice relative densities. In this way, the LSTO design space is greatly expanded for the ever increased accessible material property range. Moreover, the effective material constitutive model of the candidate lattice subject to different elementary lattice combinations is pre-established so as to eliminate the tedious in-process repetitive homogenization. Finally, a few numerical examples and experiments are explored to validate the effectiveness of the proposed method. The superiority of the proposed method is proved through comparing with a few existing LSTO methods. The options of concurrent structural topology and lattice optimization are also explored for further enhancement of the mechanical performance.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.204
Threshold uncertainty score0.628

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.198 · 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