MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414934996 · doi:10.1080/15397734.2025.2563683

Refined three-variable theory for the bending response of multidirectional functionally graded nanobeams

2025· article· en· W4414934996 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Alnujaie, Ahmed Amine Daikh, Mofareh Hassan Ghazwani, Mohammed Y. Tharwan, Alaa A. Abdelrahman, Amr E. Assie, Mohamed A. Eltaher

Bibliographic record

VenueMechanics Based Design of Structures and Machines · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComposite Structure Analysis and Optimization
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersJazan University
KeywordsBendingFunctionally graded materialTimoshenko beam theoryVibrationWork (physics)Finite element methodBuckling

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new and improved shear deformation theory, featuring three variables and a built-in correction factor, is introduced to study the bending behavior of two-directional functionally graded (FG) beams. The displacement field is developed using the foundational ideas of Euler–Bernoulli beam theory (EBT). This work explores two types of coated FG nanobeams: hardcore (HC) and softcore (SC). Three patterns of material distribution are analyzed: a bidirectional setup, a unidirectional transverse layout, and a unidirectional axial design. To capture small-scale effects, the strain gradient nonlocal elasticity theory is applied. The governing equilibrium equations for the nanobeams are established through the principle of total potential energy. A sophisticated solution method, utilizing Galerkin’s approach, is used to effectively handle different boundary conditions. The FG beam is represented as resting on an elastic foundation, characterized by the Winkler, Pasternak, and Kerr models. This study offers a thorough assessment of how these elements together affect the critical buckling loads of nanobeams.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMechanics Based Design of Structures and MachinesSame topicComposite Structure Analysis and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207