MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405979414 · doi:10.1080/15376494.2024.2443818

Finite element analysis and multi-stage cooperative optimization of the expansion-tearing energy absorption structure

2024· article· en· W4405979414 on OpenAlexaff
Lu Wang, Benhuai Li, Tao Li, Wanying Zhu, Song Yao, Kui Wang, Yong Peng

Bibliographic record

VenueMechanics of Advanced Materials and Structures · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCellular and Composite Structures
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Education and Child Care
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsTearingFinite element methodStage (stratigraphy)Absorption (acoustics)Element (criminal law)Energy (signal processing)Structural engineeringMaterials scienceMechanical engineeringEngineeringPhysicsComposite materialGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The expansion-tearing tube structure not only achieves continuous and stable energy absorption over a long stroke but also rapidly dissipates energy under high-impact loads, ensuring optimal energy absorption performance. Due to its unique structural characteristics and superior mechanical properties, this design provides valuable insights for developing energy-absorbing structures in vehicles, trains, and aircraft. In this study, a multi-stage cooperative optimization algorithm, integrating multi-objective optimization and multi-criteria decision-making theories, is proposed to address the selection and optimization of the expansion-tearing energy absorption structure. Finite element modeling is conducted, and the model’s validity is verified through experimental data. Subsequently, a crashworthiness sensitivity analysis of the structure’s parameters is performed. Based on the proposed optimization algorithm, the structural parameters are further refined, and the optimal crashworthiness configuration is identified. The results demonstrate that the optimized design obtained through this algorithm is highly reliable, with significant improvements in the overall crash performance of the expansion-tearing energy absorption structure.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.210 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMechanics of Advanced Materials and StructuresSame topicCellular and Composite StructuresFrench-language works237,207