MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411427720 · doi:10.1177/1045389x251345659

An experimental investigation on the interaction effect of cyclic loading parameters on the mechanical behavior of superelastic NiTi

2025· article· en· W4411427720 on OpenAlexafffund
Danial Davarnia, Shaohong Cheng, Niel C. Van Engelen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicShape Memory Alloy Transformations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPseudoelasticityShape-memory alloySMA*DissipationMaterials scienceNickel titaniumStructural engineeringStiffnessEngineeringComputer scienceComposite materialMartensitePhysicsMicrostructureThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Shape memory alloys (SMAs) are ideal for passive vibration control systems due to their energy dissipation capability under cyclic loading and exceptional superelasticity. Existing studies show that the mechanical properties of SMAs can vary significantly depending on the cyclic loading conditions. There is a complex interaction between the combined effect of cyclic loading parameters and internal variables that primarily governs the mechanical behavior of SMAs. While the effects of individual cyclic loading parameters on the mechanical behavior of SMAs have been widely studied, the interaction of these factors remains largely underexplored in the existing literature. The current study systematically explores the interaction of loading frequency, pre-strain, and strain amplitude on the mechanical response of superelastic NiTi, particularly in terms of energy dissipation, residual strain, and effective stiffness through an experimental approach that considers two of the parameters simultaneously. Moreover, theoretical rationalization for the observed SMA wire mechanical behavior resulted from complex interactions of different loading parameters have been offered, a dimension largely omitted in existing studies. This not only explains the inconsistent observations reported in literature, but also provides a predictive perception for SMA behavior beyond the tested parameter ranges.

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)0.001
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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Intelligent Material Systems and StructuresSame topicShape Memory Alloy TransformationsFrench-language works237,207