MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409914322 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2024-0149

Parameter optimization of fractional Maxwell viscoelastic system based on RSM model

2025· article· en· W4409914322 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bao Sun, Min Gao, Zhanlong Li, Jiankang Liu, Jinbin Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced machining processes and optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsViscoelasticityApplied mathematicsFractional calculusMathematicsPhysicsComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)Mathematical analysisMathematical optimizationThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Viscoelastic materials have been successfully used in shock absorbers of engineered vehicles because of their low cost and good cushioning effect. Aiming at the conundrums of excessive computational complexity and difficult parameter optimization of fractional order viscoelastic models, the response surface agent model is introduced to replace the displacement response of the Maxwell fractional order viscoelastic oscillator with fluid characteristics. Firstly, a fractional-order Maxwell viscoelastic model is established by integrating fractional order modeling with a viscoelastic oscillator. Secondly, the Latin hypercube method is used to collect samples, and the natural frequency, damping ratio, and order of the model are selected as design variables to build a secondary response surface proxy model. Finally, the displacement response of the model and the hysteresis area of the constitutive model are taken as the optimization objectives for multi-objective optimization. The results show that the displacement response decreases by approximately 32.6% and the hysteresis area increases by about 25% after the quadratic response surface proxy model is used to proxy the fractional order model and the parameters are optimized.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.843
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.200
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicAdvanced machining processes and optimizationFrench-language works237,207