MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7106516776 · doi:10.1051/epjconf/202533601012

Quantifying the Effect of Distance on Post-Impact Compression Failures with Radio Square Difference Coloring Techniques

2025· article· en· W7106516776 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueEPJ Web of Conferences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Response to Dynamic Loads
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompression (physics)Measure (data warehouse)SAFERSquare (algebra)Deformation (meteorology)Point (geometry)Mean squared errorShearing (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is necessary to understand the impact distance on compression failure to design a safer and more resilient material and structural system. Traditional methods of post-impact assessment are generally concerned only with the damaged area itself and little consideration to the effects with respect to distance to the point of impact. In order to bridge this gap, the current work develops the Radio Square Difference (RSD) technique as one means of measuring the spatial variation of post-impact compression behavior. The RSD framework, originally applied in signal analysis and optimization of the network, is modified here to quantify changes in compression response at a greater distance to the point of impact. The method gives a better idea of the distribution of the damage intensity in a material by investigating the squared difference between the maximum and minimum compression values recorded at any distance. As demonstrated in experiments, the RSD measure is very useful in modeling the extent of deformation and the capacity of the material to sustain impact in various spatial areas. Although compression forces might seem to be similar, significant differences in the peak levels of stresses are observed, which demonstrates that deformation and failure behavior cannot be necessarily predicted by intuitive or consistent trends. These results find applications in such areas as materials science, civil engineering, or in the automotive safety domain, where the non-uniform distribution of strains is a key factor. The fact that the graph produced by MATLAB substantiates the effectiveness of the method also confirms the credibility of the method. Generally, the present study offers a new and workable methodology of measuring residual strength of structural elements after impact and offers a base to more sophisticated predictive models, which would be more effective in handling sophisticated, real-life impact scenarios.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEPJ Web of ConferencesSame topicStructural Response to Dynamic LoadsFrench-language works237,207