MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200411495 · doi:10.1002/nme.6901

An extended finite element method with polygonal enrichment shape functions for crack propagation and stiff interfaceproblems

2021· article· en· W4200411495 on OpenAlexaff
Amir Latifaghili, Milad Bybordiani, 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
FundersUniversity of Sydney
KeywordsFinite element methodTraction (geology)Structural engineeringDisplacement (psychology)StiffnessExtended finite element methodFracture mechanicsRepresentation (politics)Degrees of freedom (physics and chemistry)Laplace transformMathematical analysisMathematicsGeometryEngineeringPhysicsMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The extended/generalized finite element method has proven significant efficiency for handling crack propagation and internal boundaries. In certain conditions, however, one of the major drawbacks relates to the representation of unrealistic traction oscillations, particularly in stiff interfaces. To the authors' best knowledge, the few remedies found in the literature depend on the type of underlying finite element, which in some aspects limits general applications. Since one of the major sources of oscillations is created by couplings within standard shape functions for certain crack arrangements, it is herein proposed a novel approach based on enrichment Laplace shape functions directly adapted to the underlying geometry of split subdomains. By doing so, all sources of oscillations are effectively removed, while enriched degrees of freedom are defined exclusively on one side of the domain. The performance is studied using both element and structural examples with highly stiff cracks. More importantly, further assessment in more complex crack propagation problems, including mixed‐mode fracture of concrete beams and a peel test, shows excellent agreement with experimental/numerical data in terms of load‐displacement curves and traction profiles. Results are shown to be objective with respect to the mesh for stiffness values virtually representing infinitely stiff interfaces.

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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.369
Teacher spread0.346 · 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

Citations14
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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