In-Timestep Remeshing for Contacting Elastodynamics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose In-Timestep Remeshing, a fully coupled, adaptive meshing algorithm for contacting elastodynamics where remeshing steps are tightly integrated, implicitly, within the timestep solve. Our algorithm refines and coarsens the domain automatically by measuring physical energy changes within each ongoing timestep solve. This provides consistent, degree-of-freedom-efficient, productive remeshing that, by construction, is physics-aware and so avoids the errors, over-refinements, artifacts, per-example hand-tuning, and instabilities commonly encountered when remeshing with timestepping methods. Our in-timestep computation then ensures that each simulation step's output is both a converged stable solution on the updated mesh and a temporally consistent trajectory with respect to the model and solution of the last timestep. At the same time, the output is guaranteed safe (intersection- and inversion-free) across all operations. We demonstrate applications across a wide range of extreme stress tests with challenging contacts, sharp geometries, extreme compressions, large timesteps, and wide material stiffness ranges - all scenarios well-appreciated to challenge existing remeshing methods.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".