Determination of optimal shot peen forming patterns using the theory of non-Euclidean plates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We show how a theoretical framework developed for modelling nonuniform growth can model the shot peen forming process. Shot peen forming consists in bombarding a metal panel with multiple millimeter-sized shot, that induce local bending of the panel. When applied to different areas of the panel, peen forming generates compound curvature profiles starting from a flat state. We present a theoretical approach and its practical realization for simulating peen forming numerically. To achieve this, we represent the panel undergoing peen forming as a bilayer plate, and we apply a geometry-based theory of non-Euclidean plates to describe its reconfiguration. Our programming code based on this approach solves two types of problems: it simulates the effect of a predefined treatment (the forward problem) and it finds the optimal treatment to achieve a predefined target shape (the inverse problem). Both problems admit using multiple peening regimes simultaneously. The algorithm was tested numerically on 200 randomly generated test cases.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".