Micromechanical formulation of stress dilatancy and its implications on the flow rule
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper presents micromechanical formulations of stress dilatancy and their use as a flow rule in classical elasto-plasticity calculations. We explore two different micromechanical approaches that both arrive at a stress dilatancy expression endowed with micromechanical information. One is based on energy calculations at both micro-and macro-scales, while the other on a micro-directional formulation of contact forces and displacements in a representative elementary volume. The nature of the flow rule that results from such formulations is discussed in relation to the dependence of the plastic strain increment vector on the loading (stress increment) direction. Interestingly, it is shown that in general three dimensional conditions, the ratios of the components of plastic strain increment are functions of not only the current stress, but also of the stress increment direction. The flow rule, commonly postulated in classical plasticity where the plastic strain increment depends solely on the current stress state, is in fact restricted to only two dimensional conditions, i.e. axi-symmetric or plane strain/plane stress.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".