A shape optimization algorithm based on directional derivatives for three‐dimensional contact problems
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This work deals with shape optimization for contact mechanics. More specifically, the linear elasticity model is considered under the small deformations hypothesis, and the elastic body is assumed to be in contact (sliding or with Tresca friction) with a rigid foundation. The mathematical formulations studied are two regularized versions of the original variational inequality: the penalty formulation and the augmented Lagrangian formulation. In order to get the shape derivatives associated to those two non‐differentiable formulations, we follow an approach based on directional derivatives introduced in previous works. This allows us to develop a gradient‐based topology optimization algorithm, built on these derivatives and a level‐set representation of shapes. The algorithm also benefits from a mesh‐cutting technique, which gives an explicit representation of the shape at each iteration, and enables us to apply the boundary conditions strongly on the contact zone. The different steps of the method are detailed. Then, to validate the approach, some numerical results on two‐dimensional and three‐dimensional benchmarks are presented.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it