Shixiang Zhao
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Shixiang Zhao has a total of 35 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
Fenglei Huang
4 shared publicationsYu. V. Petrov
4 shared publications- Yuyi Zhang
Saint Petersburg State University, Saint Petersburg, Russia
3 shared publications - Zejian Xu
State Key Laboratory of Explosion Science and Safety Protection, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing, China
3 shared publications - Liudmila Igusheva
Scientific center for information technologies and artificial intelligence, Sirius University of Science and Technology, Sirius Federal Territory, Russia
2 shared publications Mingyi Zheng
2 shared publications
Latest Publications
- 2 October 2026
- Published by Elsevier in International Journal of Plasticity
- Vol. 207
Physics-verified operator-learning-assisted inverse parameter identification of path-dependent plasticity
- 2 October 2026
- Published by Elsevier in International Journal of Plasticity
- Vol. 207
Physics-verified operator-learning-assisted inverse parameter identification of path-dependent plasticity
- 13 November 2025
- Published by Elsevier in International Journal of Impact Engineering
- Vol. 209
Fracture toughness and failure mechanism of alumina and zirconia ceramics over a wide loading rate range
- 13 November 2025
- Published by Elsevier in International Journal of Impact Engineering
- Vol. 209
Fracture toughness and failure mechanism of alumina and zirconia ceramics over a wide loading rate range
- 5 July 2025
- Published by Elsevier in International Journal of Impact Engineering
- Vol. 206
Loading rate strengthening mechanism of alumina and zirconia ceramics
- 5 July 2025
- Published by Elsevier in International Journal of Impact Engineering
- Vol. 206
Loading rate strengthening mechanism of alumina and zirconia ceramics
- Open Access
- 28 December 2024
- Published by Institute for Problems in Mechanical Engineering of the Russian Academy of Sciences - IPME RAS in Cybernetics and Physics
- No. Volume 13,
Neural networks with iterative parameter generation for determining parameters of constitutive models
Determining the parameters of constitutive models is typically a material-specific process that requires recalibration when the material changes. This procedure becomes notably time-consuming with an increased number of parameters and integral terms in the constitutive equations. Recently, a novel approach utilizing neural networks has emerged as an alternative. By training neural networks to replace constitutive equations, constitutive substitution method maps the extensive parameter space to computational results equivalent to those derived from original equations. Comparing these results with experimental data allows for efficient determination of optimal parameter vectors. The powerful fitting capabilities and rapid computational speed of neural networks significantly expedite the parameter determination process. Consequently, the task of solving for parameters transitions from a complex optimization problem to a straightforward computational search. In this work, we introduce an iterative parameter generation (IPG) algorithm to enhance this substitution method, thereby improving its ability to fit a diverse range of materials. Additionally, we explore the benefits of constructing a general parameter space applicable to various material classes.
- 28 December 2024
- Published by Institute for Problems in Mechanical Engineering of the Russian Academy of Sciences - IPME RAS in Cybernetics and Physics
- No. Volume 13,
Open AccessNeural networks with iterative parameter generation for determining parameters of constitutive models
Determining the parameters of constitutive models is typically a material-specific process that requires recalibration when the material changes. This procedure becomes notably time-consuming with an increased number of parameters and integral terms in the constitutive equations. Recently, a novel approach utilizing neural networks has emerged as an alternative. By training neural networks to replace constitutive equations, constitutive substitution method maps the extensive parameter space to computational results equivalent to those derived from original equations. Comparing these results with experimental data allows for efficient determination of optimal parameter vectors. The powerful fitting capabilities and rapid computational speed of neural networks significantly expedite the parameter determination process. Consequently, the task of solving for parameters transitions from a complex optimization problem to a straightforward computational search. In this work, we introduce an iterative parameter generation (IPG) algorithm to enhance this substitution method, thereby improving its ability to fit a diverse range of materials. Additionally, we explore the benefits of constructing a general parameter space applicable to various material classes.
- 21 September 2024
- Published by Springer Nature in Acta Mechanica
- Vol. 235 (12) , 7141-7158
Incubation-time-based modeling of the grain-size-influenced yield point phenomenon
- 21 September 2024
- Published by Springer Nature in Acta Mechanica
- Vol. 235 (12) , 7141-7158
Incubation-time-based modeling of the grain-size-influenced yield point phenomenon
- 6 November 2023
- Published by Elsevier in International Journal of Engineering Science
- Vol. 194
Modeling of the thermal softening of metals under impact loads and their temperature–time correspondence
- 6 November 2023
- Published by Elsevier in International Journal of Engineering Science
- Vol. 194
Modeling of the thermal softening of metals under impact loads and their temperature–time correspondence
- 9 November 2022
- Published by Elsevier in International Journal of Mechanical Sciences
- Vol. 240
The modified relaxation plasticity model and the non-monotonic stress–strain diagram
- 9 November 2022
- Published by Elsevier in International Journal of Mechanical Sciences
- Vol. 240
The modified relaxation plasticity model and the non-monotonic stress–strain diagram
- 17 June 2022
- Published by Pleiades Publishing Ltd in Physical Mesomechanics
- Vol. 25 (3) , 221-226
Modeling the Nonmonotonic Behavior Flow Curves under Dynamic Loads
The paper proposes an incremental relaxation plasticity (IRP) model for predicting possible instabilities and overall behavior of flow curves under dynamic loads. Compared to its original non-incremental version, the IRP model allows one to predict the behavior of stress-strain curves over a longer time after the start of yielding and to more accurately describe their instabilities such as sharp yield points (yield drops) and further nonmonotonic or oscillatory effects. The efficiency of the IRP model is demonstrated by comparing its predictions with those of the original non-incremental version and of the widely known Johnson–Cook model on the example of experimental flow curves for dual-phase high-strength steel DP800 and aluminum alloy 2519A. The major feature of the proposed IRP model is that its parameters are invariant with the loading history and strain rate of a material and are related only to the evolution of its defect structure on the micro- and mesoscales. With such a set of IRP model parameters, one can obtain a variety of flow curves of the same material at widely varied strain rates.
- 17 June 2022
- Published by Pleiades Publishing Ltd in Physical Mesomechanics
- Vol. 25 (3) , 221-226
Modeling the Nonmonotonic Behavior Flow Curves under Dynamic Loads
The paper proposes an incremental relaxation plasticity (IRP) model for predicting possible instabilities and overall behavior of flow curves under dynamic loads. Compared to its original non-incremental version, the IRP model allows one to predict the behavior of stress-strain curves over a longer time after the start of yielding and to more accurately describe their instabilities such as sharp yield points (yield drops) and further nonmonotonic or oscillatory effects. The efficiency of the IRP model is demonstrated by comparing its predictions with those of the original non-incremental version and of the widely known Johnson–Cook model on the example of experimental flow curves for dual-phase high-strength steel DP800 and aluminum alloy 2519A. The major feature of the proposed IRP model is that its parameters are invariant with the loading history and strain rate of a material and are related only to the evolution of its defect structure on the micro- and mesoscales. With such a set of IRP model parameters, one can obtain a variety of flow curves of the same material at widely varied strain rates.