MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7015772150

Validated Continuation for a simple two-dimensional elastic solid

2017· dissertation· en· W7015772150 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueRWTH Publications (RWTH Aachen) · 2017
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermoelastic and Magnetoelastic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversité Laval
KeywordsContinuationConstructiveBoundary value problemNumerical analysisNumerical continuationPartial differential equationSimple (philosophy)Differential equationReciprocal
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this thesis, we validate solutions of a fourth order boundary value problem arising from the study of microstructure in shape memory alloys using the computer-assisted ’Validated Continuation’ method described in Gameiro & Lessard (2010). The problem, as formulated in Healey&Miller (2007), considers a simplified two-dimensional model of an elastic solid undergoing forced anti-plane shear in the presence of interfacial energy.The resulting parameter-dependent differential equation can be subdivided into a fourth order linear part andtwo nonlinearities, one of which, for a particular loading parameter, vanishes. This poses an important special case for the equation.Using the reciprocal of the capillarity coefficient as continuation parameter, several paths of equilibrium solutions bifurcating from the trivial solution are followed. Each numerical solution is then validated by a constructive analytical proof yielding a so-called validation radius. Existence of this radius allows to conclude that in the vicinity of the approximated numerical zero of the finite dimensional approximated equation there has to be a truesolution of the partial differential equation. We achieve validation results for the special case for several numerical solutions at the beginning of different paths. However, due to computational limits, we can not pursue the paths to higher values of the continuation parameter, i.e. to solutions corresponding to a small capillarity coefficient and, thus, to small interfacial energy. We also analyze the difficulties of treating the general case with the same method and conclude with some ideas on different approaches for that problem.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.643
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.264 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRWTH Publications (RWTH Aachen)Same topicThermoelastic and Magnetoelastic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207