MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4361250517 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2022-0635

A unified constitutive model for instantaneous elastic–plastic and time-dependent creep behaviour of gravelly soils under complex loading

2023· article· en· W4361250517 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jingmao Liu, Fanwei Ning

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsCreepPlasticityMonotonic functionConstitutive equationMaterials scienceStress relaxationHardening (computing)Geotechnical engineeringElastic modulusMechanicsStructural engineeringGeologyComposite materialMathematicsEngineeringFinite element methodMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The behaviours of gravelly soils under monotonic, cyclic and creep loading are generally simulated in separated processes with different models, which cannot describe the interactions between the instantaneous elastic–plastic and time-dependent creep behaviours under complex loading. To address the problem, an elastic–plastic–creep model framework for gravelly soils is described to present its basic components and the differences from the elastic–plastic model framework. Within this framework, a unified constitutive model for instantaneous elastic–plastic and time-dependent creep behaviour is proposed based on the widely used generalized plasticity model. In modelling the elastic–plastic behaviour, the plastic modulus in the original model is modified to capture the creep hardening by a unified hardening state parameter for monotonic, cyclic and creep loading. In modelling the creep behaviour, the creep strain rate independent of the time variable is presented to reflect the creep behaviours under the unloading–reloading path and its difference from that of virgin loading. The proposed model can be easily implemented into the computing program as the original model with only minor adjustments. The ability to simulate the time-dependent behaviour under multistage loading/reloading-creep, different strain rates, step changes in strain rate, and stress relaxation are proven with the experiments.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil MechanicsFrench-language works237,207