A Second Order Cone Programming Approach for Simulating Biphasic Materials
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 Strain limiting is a widely used approach for simulating biphasic materials such as woven textiles and biological tissue that exhibit a soft elastic regime followed by a hard deformation limit. However, existing methods are either based on slowly converging local iterations, or offer no guarantees on convergence. In this work, we propose a new approach to strain limiting based on second order cone programming (SOCP). Our work is based on the key insight that upper bounds on per‐triangle deformations lead to convex quadratic inequality constraints. Though nonlinear, these constraints can be reformulated as inclusion conditions on convex sets, leading to a second order cone programming problem—a convex optimization problem that a) is guaranteed to have a unique solution and b) allows us to leverage efficient conic programming solvers. We first cast strain limiting with anisotropic bounds on stretching as a quadratically constrained quadratic program (QCQP), then show how this QCQP can be mapped to a second order cone programming problem. We further propose a constraint reflection scheme and empirically show that it exhibits superior energy‐preservation properties compared to conventional end‐of‐step projection methods. Finally, we demonstrate our prototype implementation on a set of examples and illustrate how different deformation limits can be used to model a wide range of material behaviors.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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