Efficient graph representation in graph neural networks for stress predictions in stiffened panels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) techniques have gained significant attention as reduced order models (ROMs) to computationally expensive structural analysis methods, such as finite element analysis (FEA). Graph neural network (GNN) is a particular type of neural network which processes data that can be represented as graphs. This allows for efficient representation of complex geometries that can change during the conceptual design of a structure or a product. In this study, we propose a novel graph embedding for the efficient representation of 3D stiffened panels by considering separate plate domains as vertices. This approach is considered using Graph Sampling and Aggregation (GraphSAGE) to predict stress distributions in stiffened panels with varying geometries. A comparison between a finite element-vertex graph representation is conducted to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed approach. A comprehensive parametric study is performed to examine the effect of structural variables on stress predictions. A wide range of geometries is considered, material nonlinearity, a few boundary conditions, together with uniform and patch loading at various positions. The study involves straight and curved panels with uni- and bi-directional stiffeners. The proposed unit-vertex representation of the panel requires only about 2% of GPU memory and about 4% of training time in comparison to a finite element-vertex embedding. The GraphSAGE model with the proposed unit-vertex representation accurately captures stress distribution across all panels, achieving an average prediction accuracy of 92.3% for the maximum von Mises stress. Our results demonstrate the immense potential of graph neural networks with the proposed graph embedding as a robust reduced-order model for 3D structures.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".