MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398784020 · doi:10.3390/app14114511

Progressive Damage Simulation of Wood Veneer Laminates and Their Uncertainty Using Finite Element Analysis Informed by Genetic Algorithms

2024· article· en· W4398784020 on OpenAlexaff
Johannes Reiner, Yun-Fei Fu, Thomas Feser

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Analysis of Composite Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersGerman Academic Exchange Service London
KeywordsVeneerFinite element methodComputer scienceStructural engineeringAlgorithmMaterials scienceComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Within the search for alternative sustainable materials for future transport applications, wood veneer laminates are promising, cost-effective candidates. Finite element simulations of progressive damage are needed to ensure the safe and reliable use of wood veneers while exploring their full potential. In this study, highly efficient finite element models simulate the mechanical response of quasi-isotropic [90/45/0/−45]s beech veneer laminates subjected to compact tension and a range of open-hole tension tests. Genetic algorithms (GA) were coupled with these simulations to calibrate the optimal input parameters and to account for the inherent uncertainties in the mechanical properties of wooden materials. The results show that the continuum damage mechanistic simulations can efficiently estimate progressive damage both qualitatively and quantitatively with errors of less than 4%. Variability can be assessedthrough the relatively limited number of 400 finite element simulations as compared to more data-intensive algorithms utilised for uncertainty quantification.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied SciencesSame topicStructural Analysis of Composite MaterialsFrench-language works237,207