MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280565019 · doi:10.1002/zamm.202100516

Uniform in‐plane elastic field inside a monoclinic elliptical inhomogeneity with non‐confocal elliptical interphase layer

2022· article· en· W4280565019 on OpenAlexafffund
Xu Wang, Peter Schiavone

Bibliographic record

VenueZAMM ‐ Journal of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics / Zeitschrift für Angewandte Mathematik und Mechanik · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComposite Material Mechanics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsInterphaseOrthotropic materialMaterials scienceElasticity (physics)Matrix (chemical analysis)Plane (geometry)OpticsComposite materialGeometryPhysicsMathematicsFinite element method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We employ the Stroh quartic formalism to study the in‐plane deformations of a three‐phase composite consisting of an elliptical inhomogeneity embedded in an infinite matrix via an intermediate interphase layer itself bounded by two elliptical boundaries. The matrix is subjected to uniform remote in‐plane loading. The two corresponding elliptical interfaces (one between the inhomogeneity and the interphase layer and the other between the interphase layer and the surrounding matrix) are non‐confocal. The inhomogeneity and the matrix are assumed to be monoclinic materials with the symmetry plane at x 3 = 0 whilst the intermediate interphase layer is composed of a mathematically degenerate orthotropic material. The non‐confocal character of the two elliptical interfaces is carefully designed according to the orthotropic property of the interphase layer. Two simple conditions are found that ensure that the internal elastic field of stresses and strains inside the elliptical inhomogeneity is uniform. For given material and geometric parameters of the composite, these two conditions give two simple relationships among the three remote in‐plane stresses. In addition, the internal uniform elastic field inside the elliptical inhomogeneity and the non‐uniform elastic field in the interphase layer are determined in real‐form in terms of the two 4 × 4 fundamental elasticity matrices for the inhomogeneity and the matrix and the three 2 × 2 Barnett‐Lothe tensors for (only) the matrix.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.577
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZAMM ‐ Journal of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics / Zeitschrift für Angewandte Mathematik und MechanikSame topicComposite Material MechanicsFrench-language works237,207