Connecting and distinguishing conventional and data-driven constitutive models

  • In conventional constitutive models for granular materials, calibration involves estimating a few parameters within known mathematical expressions. In contrast, data-driven constitutive models couple the model structure and parameters. Addressing this fundamental difference, the development of constitutive models based on Physics-encoded Neural Networks (PeNN) is guided from the perspective of conventional model development, highlighting similarities and differences. The crucial physical information that influences PeNN is explained, and the incorporation of three key state boundary surfaces in pressure-porosity space - critical state, loosest state, and densest state - via physics-informed deep learning is detailed. Physics-informed calibration is performed using the augmented Lagrangian method; then, the calibrated models undergo extensive drained and undrained simulations. Results indicate that using only physical information from state boundary surfaces, without data within these boundaries, fails to calibrate data-driven models;In conventional constitutive models for granular materials, calibration involves estimating a few parameters within known mathematical expressions. In contrast, data-driven constitutive models couple the model structure and parameters. Addressing this fundamental difference, the development of constitutive models based on Physics-encoded Neural Networks (PeNN) is guided from the perspective of conventional model development, highlighting similarities and differences. The crucial physical information that influences PeNN is explained, and the incorporation of three key state boundary surfaces in pressure-porosity space - critical state, loosest state, and densest state - via physics-informed deep learning is detailed. Physics-informed calibration is performed using the augmented Lagrangian method; then, the calibrated models undergo extensive drained and undrained simulations. Results indicate that using only physical information from state boundary surfaces, without data within these boundaries, fails to calibrate data-driven models; thus, boundary surface information represents partial physical information. While combining partial physical information with reasonably distributed data can improve model development under limited experimental data, adding more partial physical information and data does not necessarily enhance the results. The finding aims to bridge the gap between conventional and data-driven constitutive models, hopefully increasing the reliability and interpretability of data-driven models.zeige mehrzeige weniger

Metadaten exportieren

Weitere Dienste

Suche bei Google Scholar
Metadaten
Verfasserangaben:Zhihui Wang, Roberto Cudmani, Andrés Alfonso Peña OlarteORCiDGND
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmps.2025.106122
ISSN:0022-5096
ISSN:1873-4782
Titel des übergeordneten Werkes (Englisch):Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids
Untertitel (Englisch):The role of state boundary surfaces
Verlag:Elsevier
Verlagsort:Amsterdam
Dokumentart:Wissenschaftlicher Artikel
Sprache:Englisch
Jahr der Erstveröffentlichung:2025
Veröffentlichende Institution:Fachhochschule Potsdam
Datum der Freischaltung:05.05.2025
GND-Schlagwort:Deep Learning; Lagrange-Methode; Stoffgesetz
Jahrgang:200
Aufsatznummer:106122
Seitenzahl:33
Fachbereiche und Zentrale Einrichtungen:FB3 Bauingenieurwesen
DDC-Klassifikation:600 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften / 620 Ingenieurwissenschaften
Open Access:Hybrid Open Access
Lizenz (Deutsch):Creative Commons - CC BY-NC - Namensnennung - Nicht kommerziell 4.0 International
Einverstanden ✔
Diese Webseite verwendet technisch erforderliche Session-Cookies. Durch die weitere Nutzung der Webseite stimmen Sie diesem zu. Unsere Datenschutzerklärung finden Sie hier.