Evaluating Parameter Value Identification Methods for Modeling of Nonlinear Stress Relaxation in Polyethylene
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Viscous properties play a major role in the time-dependent deformation behavior of polymers and have long been characterized using spring-dashpot models. However, such models face a bottleneck of having multiple sets of model parameter values that can all be used to simulate the same deformation behavior. As a result, these model parameters have not been widely used to quantify the viscous properties. In this study, a newly developed multi-relaxation-recovery test was used to obtain the variation in stress response to deformation of polyethylene (PE) and its pipes during relaxation, revealing the complexity of PE's nonlinear viscous stress response to deformation. Using a three-branch spring-dashpot model with two Eyring's dashpots, this study shows the possibility of determining the model parameter values using four different analysis methods, namely, the mode method, peak-point method, highest-frequency method, and best-five-fits method. Model parameter values from these methods are compared and discussed in this paper, to reach the conclusion that the best-five-fits method provides the most reliable and relatively unique set of model parameter values for characterizing the mechanical performance of PE and its pipes. The best-five-fits method is expected to enable the use of the model parameters to quantify PE's viscous properties so that PE's load-carrying performance can be properly characterized, even for long-term applications.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".