MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389541020 · doi:10.17118/11143/20947

Fracture toughness estimation of advaced ceramics materials by moleculardynamics methods

2023· article· en· W4389541020 on OpenAlexaff
Junhao Chang, James D. Hogan, Zengtao Chen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicAdvanced ceramic materials synthesis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFracture toughnessCeramicMaterials scienceComposite materialDynamics (music)Computer scienceAcousticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Molecular dynamics simulation has been widely used for the research about the fracture behavior of brittle materials. The ceramics of alpha-alumina can also be explored based on this method for the atomic deformation changes under specific loadings. The alumina structures are constructed and validated with theoretical atomic structures first by some typical parameters such as the lattice parameters, and then the validated potential for this material is shown with some material constant such as Young's modulus, shear modulus and bulk modulus which are from experimental and simulation results. The stress intensity factor of the material is an important parameter to determine the fracture behavior for brittle materials which will be calculated in this paper under the typical loading conditions according to the fracture mechanics. The fracture surface energy of the single-crystal alumina models is also calculated and then used for the calculation of the fracture toughness (KIC) for comparison with the simulation results from theoretical equations and the experimental data. Along this routine, the ultimate fracture strength has been found to be increasing from 44.2 2.6 GPa to 49.5 3.1 GPa with the increase of tension loading rates from 10 9 /s to 10 11 /s along X-[100] crystal direction, and fracture toughness of alpha-alumina atomic models has been found to be decreasing from 4.22 0.16 MPa(m^1/2) to 3.26 0.18 MPa(m^1/2) with the increasing tension loading rate from 10 9 /s to 10 11 /s. Other parameters such as stiffness have the similar trends with the fracture strength and fracture toughness. These typical parameters of fracture trends of alpha-alumina models have been explored under the changes of tension loading rate, which can help bridge the microscale modelling of brittle material with the higher-scale 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.311 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced ceramic materials synthesisFrench-language works237,207