Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

We have reported a new, multi-scale approach that improves the fatigue resistance of particle-filled rubbers, published in Nature. Our sample (right) was nearly intact after 350,000 cycles. Look at the thread from Jason, co-first author of the paper.

45,195 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren •via X (Twitter)

8 Kommentare

Profilbild von Junsoo Kim
Junsoo Kimvor 2 Jahren

Besides the science of the paper, here I would like to highlight our fatigue tester. The fatigue of soft materials is an old subject but not easy to study as it is expensive! A tensile tester is ~$100k. ~500k cycles are needed for one fatigue threshold, which takes several days.

Profilbild von Junsoo Kim
Junsoo Kimvor 2 Jahren

In this paper, we built multiple fatigue testers with ~$500/ea. It is good enough for soft materials where the load is low. All parts are from either Amazon or McMaster-Carr, controlled by Arduino. This allowed us to measure the fatigue threshold as a function of two variables!

Profilbild von Junsoo Kim
Junsoo Kimvor 2 Jahren

The detailed procedure is in the Method. The entire Arduino code is in the Supplementary Information. An undergraduate student can build this. One can improve it with a load cell. *There is one typo in the code: directionPin = 8 -> 9; stepPin = 9 -> 8.

Profilbild von Junsoo Kim
Junsoo Kimvor 2 Jahren

The Harvard SEAS posted an article about our work. We initially hypothesized something logical but it turned out to be wrong. Actually, we wished we were wrong. Finding a pretty pebble on the shore is always thankful and joyful.

Profilbild von Yi Yang
Yi Yangvor 2 Jahren

@jasongsteck @zhigangsuo @ykutsovsky Just got a chance to check out this cute video 😃. It's interesting to see a new function of the kirigami gripper as a test platform for preventing crack growth. @dpholmes

Profilbild von Jiawei Yang
Jiawei Yangvor 2 Jahren

@jasongsteck @zhigangsuo @ykutsovsky Another piece of impact work

Profilbild von Chenghai Li
Chenghai Livor 2 Jahren

@jasongsteck @zhigangsuo @ykutsovsky Congrats, fantastic work!

Profilbild von International Journal of Extreme Manufacturing
International Journal of Extreme Manufacturingvor 2 Jahren

@jasongsteck @zhigangsuo @ykutsovsky Congratulations!

Ähnliche Videos

*New Paper on AI & Democracy* Imagine two approaches to democracy. The one we have today, where citizens choose a professional politician to represent them and others. Or an augmented form of democracy, where each citizen controls a personalized AI that helps them participate in thousands of nuanced decisions. This second approach is the idea of Augmented Democracy I introduced six years ago at TED. In our latest paper we explore a simplified version of Augmented Democracy by combining off-the-shelf LLMs, such as ChatGPT, with data collected using a collaborative government program builder. This was an online game where people build a personalized government program using proposals extracted from the programs of the candidates of the 2022 presidential election in Brazil. So how accurate are these augmented forms of democracy? Imagine a user who gave us 40 answers. We can use the first 20 to fine-tune a model that we can test using the 20 answers the model didn’t see. We can then compare the accuracy of these predictions with the ones obtained by a “bundle” rule, which assumes that users that self-reported to be from the left or right always chose the proposals from the candidate that shares their political identity. This showed us that LLMs were more accurate at predicting policy preferences than the bundle rule, meaning that the preferences captured in the participation data were more nuanced than a left-right axis, and that the LLMs can capture some of that nuance. Also, the LLMs can choose among policies coming from the same candidate, which is something that we cannot do using a bundle rule. But can these LLMs help us complete the aggregate preferences of the population? Direct or unbundled forms of participation can result in incomplete data when people answer only a fraction of all questions. In our paper, we simulate this incompleteness by sampling the full dataset. We ask how close we can get to the full dataset by using a random sample, or a random sample augmented by predictions made by these LLMs. Overall, we find that LLM-augmented data gets much closer to the full dataset than a pure random sample. These results do not mean that augmented democracy technology is ready, but they means we are in a much better place to continue exploring this idea than six years ago. This paper was a collaborative effort with Jairo Gudino, PhD student at CCL at the University of Toulouse Capitole and Umberto Grandi from IRIT also at the University of Toulouse Capitole. We hope you find these results insightful!

César A. Hidalgo

26,915 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr