Magnetic Filler Polymer Composites—Morphology Characterization and Experimental and Stochastic Finite Element Analyses of Mechanical Properties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Polymer composites containing magnetic fillers are promising materials for a variety of applications, such as in energy storage and medical fields. To facilitate the engineering design of respective components, a comprehensive understanding of the mechanical behavior of such inhomogeneous and potentially highly anisotropic materials is important. Therefore, the authors created magnetic composites by compression molding. The epoxy polymer matrix was modified with a commercial-grade thickening agent. Isotropic magnetic particles were added as the functional filler. The microstructural morphology, especially the filler distribution, dispersion, and alignment, was characterized using microscopy techniques. The mechanical properties of the composites were experimentally characterized and studied by stochastic finite element analysis (SFEA). Modeling was conducted employing four cases to predict the elastic modulus: fully random distribution, randomly aligned distribution, a so-called "rough" interface contact, and a bonded interface contact. Results from experiments and SFEA modeling were compared and discussed.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".