MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229963762 · doi:10.1080/01495739.2016.1273746

Analysis of an interface crack of arbitrary shape in a three-dimensional transversely isotropic magnetoelectrothermoelastic bimaterial—part 2: Numerical method

2017· article· en· W4229963762 on OpenAlexaff
HuaYang Dang, MingHao Zhao, C. Y. Fan, Zengtao Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Thermal Stresses · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNumerical methods in engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeaviside step functionStress intensity factorMathematical analysisTransverse isotropyDiscontinuity (linguistics)SingularityBoundary element methodIsotropyGeometryMathematicsBoundary value problemFinite element methodPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The extended displacement discontinuity (EDD) boundary integral equation and boundary-element method are extended and developed to analyze an arbitrarily shaped, planar interface crack in a three-dimensional, transversely isotropic, magnetoelectrothermoelastic bimaterial under combined, thermoelectromagnetomechanical loadings. The fundamental solutions for uniformly distributed EDDs applied over a constant triangular element are obtained through integrating the fundamental solutions for the unit-point EDDs given by Part 1 over the triangular area. To eliminate the oscillatory singularity near the crack front, the Dirac delta function in the integral–differential equations is approximated by the Gaussian distribution function, and accordingly, the Heaviside step function is replaced by the Error function. The extended stress intensity factors without oscillatory singularities, the energy release rate, and the local J-integral in terms of intensity factors are all obtained. To validate the solution, the EDD boundary-element method is proposed. As an application, an elliptical interface crack is numerically simulated. The influences of the applied combined loadings and material-mismatch as well as the ellipticity ratio on the multiphysical response are studied.

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)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations9
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Thermal StressesSame topicNumerical methods in engineeringFrench-language works237,207