MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410088836 · doi:10.1117/12.3051536

Indentation-driven machine learning approach for estimating rate-dependency in cohesive-frictional materials

2025· article· en· W4410088836 on OpenAlexaff
Hamed Esmaeili, Reza Rizvi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdhesion, Friction, and Surface Interactions
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDependency (UML)IndentationComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMaterials scienceMechanical engineeringStructural engineeringComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The indentation technique offers an efficient, semi-destructive, and high-throughput approach for characterizing mechanical properties across various length scales. While extensively studied for metals and ceramics, its application to time- and pressure-sensitive materials, such as polymers, remains limited. For time-dependent materials, the strain rate sensitivity (SRS) of flow stress has been shown to correlate with the SRS of hardness, with a constraint factor governed by the hardness-to-effective elastic modulus ratio (H/E<sup>∗</sup>). This study introduces a finite element (FE)-based parametric study to investigate the relationship between the SRS of hardness and the SRS of flow stress in materials exhibiting both time-dependent and pressure-sensitive behavior, incorporating the parameter H/E<sup>∗</sup>. Finally, a neural network model is trained to predict the SRS of flow stress directly from the nano-indentation data, achieving an R<sup>2</sup> score of 0.91, an RMSE of approximately 0.04, and an MAE of around 0.03. The findings of this study provide an integrated data-driven and high-throughput framework for the accelerated characterization of materials.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.747
Threshold uncertainty score0.594

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.247 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdhesion, Friction, and Surface InteractionsFrench-language works237,207