Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38741577›Full record

ArticleComputational mechanics2024

Benchmarking physics-informed frameworks for data-driven hyperelasticity.

Vahidullah Taç, Kevin Linka, Francisco Sahli-Costabal, Ellen Kuhl, Adrian Buganza Tepole

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Computational mechanics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Vahidullah TaçSchool of Mechanical Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, USA.
Kevin LinkaDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, USA.
Francisco Sahli-CostabalDepartment of Mechanical and Metallurgical Engineering, Institute for Biological and Medical Engineering, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Ellen KuhlDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, USA.
Adrian Buganza TepoleSchool of Mechanical Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, USA.

Funding

Multi-Scale Modeling to Predict Long-Term Growth and Remodeling of Skin in Response to StretchR01AR074525 · NIAMS · PURDUE UNIVERSITY · PI BUGANZA TEPOLE, ADRIAN · 2019 to 2023
$2.7M
NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR074525
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Data-driven methods have changed the way we understand and model materials. However, while providing unmatched flexibility, these methods have limitations such as reduced capacity to extrapolate, overfitting, and violation of physics constraints. Recently, frameworks that automatically satisfy these requirements have been proposed. Here we review, extend, and compare three promising data-driven methods: Constitutive Artificial Neural Networks (CANN), Input Convex Neural Networks (ICNN), and Neural Ordinary Differential Equations (NODE). Our formulation expands the strain energy potentials in terms of sums of convex non-decreasing functions of invariants and linear combinations of these. The expansion of the energy is shared across all three methods and guarantees the automatic satisfaction of objectivity, material symmetries, and polyconvexity, essential within the context of hyperelasticity. To benchmark the methods, we train them against rubber and skin stress-strain data. All three approaches capture the data almost perfectly, without overfitting, and have some capacity to extrapolate. This is in contrast to unconstrained neural networks which fail to make physically meaningful predictions outside the training range. Interestingly, the methods find different energy functions even though the prediction on the stress data is nearly identical. The most notable differences are observed in the second derivatives, which could impact performance of numerical solvers. On the rich data used in these benchmarks, the models show the anticipated trade-off between number of parameters and accuracy. Overall, CANN, ICNN and NODE retain the flexibility and accuracy of other data-driven methods without compromising on the physics. These methods are ideal options to model arbitrary hyperelastic material behavior.

Indexed as

Constitutive modelsNeural networksNonlinear mechanicsPhysics-informed Machine LearningPolyconvexity

Identifiers

PMID38741577
PMCPMC11090478

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.