MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406080264 · doi:10.1016/j.coco.2025.102254

Compression, impact and residual strength after impact properties of graphene/fiberglass/epoxy multiscale composites

2025· article· en· W4406080264 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Rafiee, Akram Fallah, S. Hosseini Rad, Michel R. Labrosse

Bibliographic record

VenueComposites Communications · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Behavior of Composites
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceComposite materialEpoxyGrapheneIzod impact strength testResidual strengthCompression (physics)ResidualImpact energyUltimate tensile strengthNanotechnologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: The effect of graphene nanoplatelets (GNPs), graphene oxide (GO), and reduced-graphene oxide (rGO) on compression, impact and residual strength after impact properties of glass-fiber reinforced polymer composites (GFRPs) were examined. Vacuum-assisted resin transfer molding (VARTM) method was used to simultaneously modify the fibers and the matrix with carbon nanomaterials. A solution of nanoparticle/epoxy mixed in a solvent was sprayed onto the fabric and was also introduced into the epoxy matrix by an agitator mixer. The results from tensile testing indicated that the addition of GNPs, GO, and rGO augmented the mechanical properties of glass fiber-reinforced composites. According to our experimental results, both fiber and matrix-dominant properties were improved under compression, impact and residual strength after impact properties tests, leading to a superior composite.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComposites CommunicationsSame topicMechanical Behavior of CompositesFrench-language works237,207