MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4291269765 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511762673

The Geometrical Language of Continuum Mechanics

2010· book· en· W4291269765 on OpenAlexaff
Marcelo Epstein

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2010
Typebook
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDynamics and Control of Mechanical Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDifferential geometryTangentDifferential (mechanical device)Differential formContinuum mechanicsGeometryMathematicsGeometric mechanicsAnalytical mechanicsClassical mechanicsPhysicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Epstein presents the fundamental concepts of modern differential geometry within the framework of continuum mechanics. Divided into three parts of roughly equal length, the book opens with a motivational chapter to impress upon the reader that differential geometry is indeed the natural language of continuum mechanics or, better still, that the latter is a prime example of the application and materialisation of the former. In the second part, the fundamental notions of differential geometry are presented with rigor using a writing style that is as informal as possible. Differentiable manifolds, tangent bundles, exterior derivatives, Lie derivatives, and Lie groups are illustrated in terms of their mechanical interpretations. The third part includes the theory of fiber bundles, G-structures, and groupoids, which are applicable to bodies with internal structure and to the description of material inhomogeneity. The abstract notions of differential geometry are thus illuminated by practical and intuitively meaningful engineering applications.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.005

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.161
Teacher spread0.156 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations107
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicDynamics and Control of Mechanical SystemsFrench-language works237,207