Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 70 references

A multi-physics model for dislocation driven spontaneous grain nucleation and microstructure evolution in polycrystals

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that a single thermodynamically consistent field theory can make stored dislocations spontaneously nucleate new grains at existing grain boundaries, without any ad hoc seeding.

desk verdict A genuinely new nucleation mechanism in a unified HMP-CCP framework, but the 'spontaneous' claim rests on hand-tuned constitutive choices that need a lot more robustness checking. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.08843 v1 pith:FPJPQYZO submitted 2025-06-10 cond-mat.mtrl-sci physics.comp-ph

Izzet Tarik Tandogan , Michael Budnitzki , Stefan Sandfeld This is my paper
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sciphysics.comp-ph
keywords spontaneousgrainnucleationorientationphasefieldCosseratcrystalplasticityrecrystallizationstoreddislocationenergyboundarymigrationstrain-inducedmodeling
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper tries to establish that recrystallization nucleation need not be inserted by hand: a unified model coupling Cosserat crystal plasticity with the Henry-Mellenthin-Plapp orientation phase field can generate new grains from the deformation state itself. The key move is a modified coupling function that lets stored dislocation energy destabilize a grain boundary, widen it into a nearly uniform orientation gradient, and then split it into two boundaries around a dislocation-free nucleus. If this works, nucleation sites, timing, and even the orientation of a new grain become outputs of the coupled mechanics and microstructure evolution rather than externally imposed criteria.

What carries the argument

The central object is the modified stored-dislocation coupling function $$\$\varphi$(\eta)=\frac{1}{2}c_3\left(\eta-$c_1^{{-1}}$\ln[\$\cosh$(c_1(c_2-\eta))]\right)+c_0,$$ whose derivative $\phi_{,\eta}$ is a step-like function of the order parameter $\eta\in[0,1]$. It enters the phase-field driving force through the term $-\phi_{,\eta}\sum_\alpha \frac{\lambda}{2}\mu_e b^2 r_\alpha^2$, so the stored dislocation energy acts differently in the crystalline bulk and inside the diffuse grain boundary. Combined with the dislocation recovery term in Eq. (28), active only when $\dot{\eta}>0$, this step-like coupling creates the unstable widening and subsequent split of the grain boundary that constitutes nucleation.

What would settle it

Run the periodic bicrystal setup with initial misorientations of 2.5° and 15°, a uniform stored dislocation density of $2.5\times10^{15}\,\mathrm{m}^{-2}$, $C_D=100$, $c_1=100$, $c_2=0.95$, and $c_3=1.7$: the paper predicts no nucleation at 2.5° and nucleation at 15°. Observing the reverse, or any nucleation at 2.5° under these exact parameters, would falsify the claimed threshold.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that spontaneous, dislocation-driven grain nucleation follows from the HMP-CCP equations once the stored-dislocation energy coupling function $\phi(\eta)$ takes a step-like derivative and dislocation recovery is active only while the order parameter increases. A sufficiently high statically stored dislocation density inside a diffuse grain boundary creates a driving force that widens the boundary into an unstable, nearly uniform orientation gradient; the recovery term then reduces the dislocation density wherever $\eta$ increases, which further increases $\eta$. This self-perpetuating loop splits one grain boundary into two and leaves a dislocation-free grain whose orientation is set by the neighboring grains and by the dislocation distribution across the boundary. The paper demonstrates the mechanism in periodic bicrystal and polycrystal simulations, capturing strain-induced boundary migration, subgrain growth and coalescence, and a misorientation threshold for nucleation.

Load-bearing premise

The whole nucleation effect rests on a step-like coupling function whose shape, steepness, and threshold are chosen by hand and not derived from dislocation physics; if that form is not physically robust, the claimed spontaneity is a property of the chosen constitutive function rather than a generic consequence of the coupled theory.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the mechanism is correct, recrystallization simulations no longer need separate nucleation criteria or planted nuclei: nucleation sites and new-grain orientations are determined by the deformation field and the calibrated coupling function.
  • The model predicts a misorientation threshold for nucleation, between about 5 and 10 degrees for the calibrated parameters, below which a boundary merely widens and above which it splits into new grains.
  • The nucleus orientation is bounded by the parent orientations and is biased toward the grain with lower stored dislocation density when the stored energy is asymmetric across the boundary.
  • Grain boundary velocity controls whether a nucleus stabilizes into a new grain or rotates back and disappears, so the same mechanism can reproduce both successful nucleation and subgrain coalescence.
  • Deformation-induced features such as slip and kink bands and subgrains are captured by the same coupled framework and feed directly into the nucleation behavior.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the mechanism is robust, the same coupling function could be extended to three dimensions with anisotropic grain boundary energy to predict not only where nuclei form but how the recrystallization texture evolves, which the isotropic two-dimensional examples do not address.
  • The parameter $c_3$ sets the dislocation density scale that triggers nucleation, implying a testable relation between pre-strain and recrystallization onset: varying $c_3$ should shift the critical strain in a predictable way.
  • The orientation rule in Eq. (43) suggests an experimentally checkable bias: in partially recrystallized deformed bicrystals with different stored energies, the new grain orientation should lie closer to the lower-stored-energy side; EBSD measurements could test this.
  • Because nucleation depends on a hand-chosen step form of $\phi_{,\eta}$, a natural next step would be deriving that form from a microscopically motivated dislocation-boundary interaction rather than treating it as a free constitutive choice.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a unified multi-physics model that couples Cosserat crystal plasticity with the Henry–Mellenthin–Plapp (HMP) orientation phase-field approach, with the goal of achieving spontaneous, dislocation-driven grain nucleation at grain boundaries during recrystallization. The model extends the authors' earlier HMP-CCP framework by modifying the coupling function φ(η) that multiplies the stored dislocation energy (Eqs. 37–38) and by adding a one-sided recovery term to the dislocation density evolution (Eq. 28). Through periodic bicrystal and polycrystal simulations, the paper demonstrates strain-induced boundary migration, subgrain growth, coalescence, kink/slip band formation, and what it calls spontaneous nucleation of new grains whose orientations are bounded by the parent grains. The central claim is that this nucleation emerges from the deformed state and the chosen constitutive functions, without ad hoc seeding.

Significance. If the central claim is accepted, the model would be a noteworthy step toward unified, thermodynamically consistent simulations of recrystallization, eliminating the staggered seeding step that is common in current phase-field–crystal-plasticity approaches. The paper has clear strengths: the free-energy and dissipation-potential derivation is carried out carefully (Eqs. 12–34), the numerical implementation is monolithic, and the simulations reproduce several experimentally observed mechanisms (SIBM, subgrain growth, coalescence) in a single framework. The authors also honestly report limitations (2D, small strain, isotropic GB energy, qualitative calibration). However, the significance of the contribution hinges on whether the nucleation mechanism is a robust consequence of the coupled theory or a property of specifically hand-tuned constitutive functions; the present manuscript does not yet settle that question.

major comments (3)
  1. [2.3, Eqs. (37)–(38) and Section 3.1] The step-like coupling function φ(η) is introduced ad hoc: the paper gives no derivation from dislocation physics, and its key parameters c1=100, c2≈0.85–0.95, c3=1.7 are chosen by hand (Section 3.1). The nucleation behavior is a direct consequence of this specific form: the effective free-energy potential for η becomes double-welled only because φ,η has a step at η=c2. The paper even states (Section 1) that adjusting c2 strengthens or weakens nucleation. To support the central claim that nucleation is 'spontaneous' in a robust sense, the authors need to show that the mechanism does not crucially depend on the exact functional form and parameter values—for example, by testing smoother saturating forms with φ,η(1)=0, varying c1 and c2 over a range, or deriving φ from a dislocation-based argument. Without such a robustness study, the headline claim remains an artifact of a particular constitutive choice rather than a generic feature of the coupled theory.
  2. [3.2.2, Eq. (28)] The recovery term −ρ C_D A(η) η̇, active only when η̇>0, is essential to the proposed self-perpetuating nucleation loop: it reduces ρ as η increases, which increases the driving force for further η increase, creating a runaway process. The paper justifies this as representing recovery in the wake of a migrating grain boundary, but the model applies it also to nucleation sites, where no prior GB motion exists. The one-sided switching (η̇>0 vs. η̇≤0) is a non-smooth, non-reciprocal constitutive choice that is not derived from any underlying mechanism. Since the entire nucleation scenario depends on this asymmetry, the authors should either provide a physical rationale for why recovery is completely suppressed when η̇<0, or demonstrate that a symmetric or continuous recovery law (e.g., with an A(η) that does not depend on the sign of η̇) still produces nucleation. Without this, the mechanism is partly manufactured by the switch.
  3. [3.3, Figs. 8–18] The paper does not report any convergence or mesh-sensitivity study. The nucleation mechanism involves an instability that broadens a diffuse grain boundary until it splits (Section 3.2), and the diffuse interface width is known to interact with the numerical resolution in orientation phase-field models. The authors mention that 'convergence of the model deteriorates when the band starts to expand' (Section 3.3.2), but they provide no systematic refinement study or error estimates. In particular, the quantitative threshold 5°<Δθ_T<10° (Section 3.2.3) and the orientation rule (43) are derived from simulations on specific meshes (400 blocks for the bicrystal; 48,496 and 195,128 nodes for the polycrystals). Without mesh-independence evidence, these quantitative results are not yet established.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Introduction, first paragraph] The phrase 'model-free spontaneous dislocation driven grain nucleation' is overstated and inconsistent with the rest of the paper, which introduces a new constitutive function φ(η) with several free parameters; 'model-free' should be removed or replaced by 'parameter-dependent'.
  2. [Fig. 1 caption] The caption uses φ′(η) but the text uses ϕ,η; please use consistent notation. Also, the legend for the new form is not clearly distinguishable in grayscale.
  3. [Eq. (28) and surrounding text] The term (−2dρ α/b)|˙γ| in Eq. (28) is described in the text (Section 3.3.2) as 'the recovery term, i.e. (−2dρ α/b)|˙γ|', but in the equation it appears as part of the hardening law; the naming is confusing.
  4. [Section 3.2, Eq. (41)] In fη4, the expression λ/2 μ_e b^2 ρ should be clearly connected to the r_α definition in Eq. (21); as written, the b^2 factor appears without explanation.
  5. [Figs. 4–8] The units in the figure labels, e.g., 'm □2' and 's □1', are corrupted (likely missing superscripts); the authors should check the rendered notation.
  6. [Eq. (43)] The notation '<<' is used to mean 'much less than' but is not defined; a precise statement (e.g., with a small parameter) would be clearer.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the nucleation mechanism follows transparently from newly introduced constitutive functions, and no prediction reduces to a fitted target or self-citation.

full rationale

The paper's central claim—dislocation-driven spontaneous nucleation at GBs—is implemented by explicitly adding a step-like coupling function φ(η) (Eqs. 37–38) and a one-sided recovery term (Eq. 28). These are constitutive assumptions, not hidden fits. Eq. (42) is a straightforward equilibrium condition derived from the stated free energy and driving-force equation (32), and the nucleation criterion is the resulting inequality between ηeq and the current η; no equation is equivalent to an independently fitted target. The threshold misorientation and nucleus orientation rules are emergent outputs of the simulations, not imposed parameters. The model builds on the authors' previous HMP-CCP framework via self-citations (Tandogan et al., 2025), but that framework supplies only the baseline balance and constitutive structure; the new nucleation claim is supported by the new equations and simulations in this paper, not by citing an unverified theorem. Although c3 = 1.7 is chosen with the saturation dislocation density in mind, the paper does not rename that choice as an independent prediction; the qualitative mechanism remains a designed model capability. Thus no step in the derivation chain collapses into its own input.

Assumptions & free parameters 9 free parameters · 9 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a set of hand-chosen constitutive functions and parameters, most notably the new coupling function φ(η) and the η̇>0-gated recovery term. The model also inherits the standard HMP phase field forms and the Kocks-Mecking-Teodosiu hardening law. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (9)
  • c1 (φ steepness) = 100
    Controls steepness of the step in φ,η (Eq. 38); chosen by hand to localize the dislocation driving force to the GB region.
  • c2 (φ step position) = 0.85-0.95 in different runs
    Sets the η value above which the dislocation energy coupling saturates; controls nucleation threshold and GB velocity; varied in parameter study (Figs. 4-7).
  • c3 (φ magnitude) = 1.7
    Scales the dislocation driving force; chosen so η stays non-negative at the saturation dislocation density ρ=2.5×10^15 m^-2 from the Kocks-Mecking law.
  • C_D (recovery coefficient) = 100
    Recovery strength in Eq. (28); chosen to allow full dislocation recovery at nuclei and behind migrating GBs.
  • f0 (phase field energy scale) = 37110 kPa
    Normalization coefficient in free energy (Eq. 15); calibrated together with c to copper GB energy data (Fig. 2).
  • c (Read-Shockley coefficient) = 3
    Coefficient in singular function g(η) (Eq. 35); part of GB energy calibration to Wolf (1990) atomistic data up to 30° misorientation.
  • μc (Cosserat couple modulus) = 75 GPa
    Penalty enforcing the constraint e×e≈0 (Eq. 5); chosen large enough to make microrotation follow lattice orientation.
  • τη (inverse GB mobility) = 10^2 f0 t0 (loading), 10^4 f0 t0 (recrystallization)
    Process-dependent mobility via Eq. (39); chosen to separate deformation and heat treatment time scales; affects whether nuclei stabilize.
  • τ̂* (eigenrotation mobility) = 10^2 f0 t0 (loading), 10^1 f0 t0 (recrystallization)
    Controls atomic reshuffling and reorientation during GB migration; limited by τη.
assumptions (9)
  • standard math Clausius-Duhem inequality and principle of virtual power
    Used to derive balance laws and constitutive relations (Section 2.1-2.2).
  • domain assumption Small deformation kinematics
    Strains are small; 15% shear noted as out of scope in Section 3.3.1.
  • domain assumption 2D restriction with single out-of-plane rotation θ
    Model formulated in 2D (Section 2.2); extension to 3D left to future work.
  • domain assumption Isotropic grain boundary energy
    Acknowledged in Section 3.3.2 to produce circular grains unlike experiments.
  • domain assumption No plastic curvature
    Stated in Section 2.1 for simplicity, though inclusion is possible.
  • domain assumption Specific forms V(η) and g(η) from HMP model (Eq. 35)
    Borrowed from Henry et al. (2012) and Staublin et al. (2022); conditions restrict the choices.
  • ad hoc to paper New coupling function φ(η) with step-like derivative (Eq. 37)
    Introduced to create the dislocation-driven nucleation instability; no independent physical derivation.
  • ad hoc to paper Recovery active only when η̇>0 with A(η) localization (Eqs. 28-29)
    Chosen because prior tanh(|∇θ|) recovery failed during GB merges; essential for self-perpetuating nucleation.
  • ad hoc to paper Process-dependent inverse mobility τη(θ̇) (Eq. 39)
    Needed to cover different time scales of loading and heat treatment; no first-principles derivation.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A multi-physics model for dislocation driven spontaneous grain nucleation and microstructure evolution in polycrystals." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FPJPQYZO

@misc{pith2026250608843,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A multi-physics model for dislocation driven spontaneous grain nucleation and microstructure evolution in polycrystals},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FPJPQYZO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.08843}
}
read the original abstract

The granular microstructure of metals evolves significantly during thermomechanical processing through viscoplastic deformation and recrystallization. Microstructural features such as grain boundaries (GBs), subgrains, localized deformation bands, and non-uniform dislocation distributions critically influence grain nucleation and growth during recrystallization. Traditionally, modeling this coupled evolution involves separate, specialized frameworks for mechanical deformation and microstructural kinetics, typically used in a staggered manner. Nucleation is often introduced ad hoc, with nuclei seeded at predefined sites based on criteria like critical dislocation density, stress or strain. This is a consequence of the inherent limitations of the staggered approach, where newly formed GBs or grains have to be incorporated with additional processing. In this work, we propose a unified, thermodynamically consistent field theory that enables spontaneous nucleation driven by stored dislocations at GBs. The model integrates Cosserat crystal plasticity with the Henry-Mellenthin-Plapp orientation phase field approach, allowing the simulation of key microstructural defects, as well as curvature- and stored energy-driven grain boundary migration. The unified approach enables seamless identification of GBs that emerge from deformation and nucleation. Nucleation is activated through a coupling function that links dislocation-related free energy contributions to the phase field. Dislocation recovery occurs both at newly formed nuclei and behind migrating GBs. The model's capabilities are demonstrated using periodic bicrystal and polycrystal simulations, where mechanisms such as strain-induced boundary migration, subgrain growth, and coalescence are captured. The proposed spontaneous nucleation mechanism offers a novel addition to the capabilities of phase field models for recrystallization simulation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.08843 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Comparison of the SSD energy multiplier function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Grain boundary energies at increasing misorientations calibrated to atomistic simulations of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Periodic bicrystal structure with variation in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (15 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Order parameter η (a), orientation θ (b) and SSD density ρ (c) with SSD recovery activated (CD = 100) or deactivated (CD = 0) at times 0, 1×103 and 3×103 s. The profiles are the same at t = 0 s. The driving terms for η˙ on the right hand side of equation (32) (d) for C…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Order parameter η (a), orientation θ (b) and SSD density ρ (c) with CD = 100 plotted at different times for varying misorientations. Parameters of ϕ(η) are c1 = 100, c2 = 0.95 and c3 = 1.7. ∆θ = 10◦ , 15◦ , 20◦ (Fig 5a). However, for the cases with ∆θ = 2.5◦ , 5◦ , the…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Order parameter η (a), SSD density ρ (b) and orientation θ (c) with CD = 100 plotted at different times for varying SSD distributions around grain boundary. Parameters of ϕ(η) are c1 = 100, c2 = 0.95 and c3 = 1.7. triggered, the orientation of the nucleus is determined…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Orientation θ for ρ1/ρ2 = 1 distribution (a) and energy distribution when a 15◦ grain boundary divides into two grain boundaries (b). Orientation θ for ρ1/ρ2 = 2.3/2.5 distribution (c) and order parameter η (d). Parameters of ϕ(η) are c1 = 100 and c3 = 1.7. consider th…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Order parameter η (a), orientation θ (b) SSD density ρ (c) and viscoplastic slip γ (d). Specimen is deformed by different amounts before applying heat treatment. Parameters of ϕ(η) are c1 = 100, c2 = 0.9 and c3 = 1.7. 3.3. Plastic deformation and microstructure evoluti…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Periodic polycrystal structure with 6 grains and their orientations, where arrows show slip direction of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Granular microstructure is loaded in shear with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Granular microstructure is loaded in shear with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: The deformed structure in Fig. 10b and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: The deformed structure in Fig. 10b and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: The structure is deformed by 5%, 5.5% or 6%, then heat treated for 10000 s with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Granular microstructure is loaded in shear with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: The deformed structure in Fig. 10c and Fig. 15a is allowed to recrystallize with c2 = 0.9 which activates grain nucleation. From left to right orientation P θ, order parameter η and total statically stored dislocation density ρ α are shown at different times. Mechanic…
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: A granular structure with 32 grains are deformed in shear by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_17.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: A granular structure with 32 grains are deformed in shear by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_18.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

70 extracted references · 69 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A unified framework for polycrystal plasticity with grain boundary evolution

    Admal, N.C., Po, G., Marian, J., 2018. A unified framework for polycrystal plasticity with grain boundary evolution. International Journal of Plasticity 106, 1–30

    work page 2018

  2. [2]

    Recrystallization mechanisms and microstructure develop- ment in emerging metallic materials: A review

    Alaneme, K.K., Okotete, E.A., 2019. Recrystallization mechanisms and microstructure develop- ment in emerging metallic materials: A review. Journal of science: Advanced materials and devices 4, 19–33

    work page 2019

  3. [3]

    The FEniCS project version 1.5

    Alnaes, M., Blechta, J., Hake, J., Johansson, A., Kehlet, B., Logg, A., Richardson, C., Ring, J., Rognes, M.E., Wells, G.N., 2015. The FEniCS project version 1.5. Archive of Numerical Software 3

    work page 2015

  4. [4]

    Computer simulation of grain growth—I

    Anderson, M., Srolovitz, D., Grest, G., Sahni, P., 1984. Computer simulation of grain growth—I. Kinetics. Acta Metallurgica 32, 783–791. 29

    work page 1984

  5. [5]

    Strain localization in ductile single crystals

    Asaro, R.J., Rice, J., 1977. Strain localization in ductile single crystals. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 25, 309–338

    work page 1977

  6. [6]

    The deformation of plastically non-homogeneous materials

    Ashby, M., 1970. The deformation of plastically non-homogeneous materials. The Philosophical Magazine: A Journal of Theoretical Experimental and Applied Physics 21, 399–424

    work page 1970

  7. [7]

    A Cosserat–phase-field theory of crystal plasticity and grain boundary migration at finite deformation

    Ask, A., Forest, S., Appolaire, B., Ammar, K., 2019. A Cosserat–phase-field theory of crystal plasticity and grain boundary migration at finite deformation. Continuum Mechanics and Ther- modynamics 31, 1109–1141

    work page 2019

  8. [8]

    Microstructure evolution in deformed poly- crystals predicted by a diffuse interface Cosserat approach

    Ask, A., Forest, S., Appolaire, B., Ammar, K., 2020. Microstructure evolution in deformed poly- crystals predicted by a diffuse interface Cosserat approach. Advanced Modeling and Simulation in Engineering Sciences 7, 1–28

    work page 2020

Show all 70 references
  1. [9]

    A duality-based coupling of Cosserat crystal plasticity and phase field theories for modeling grain refinement

    Baek, J., Chen, J.S., Tupek, M., Beckwith, F., Fang, H.E., 2022. A duality-based coupling of Cosserat crystal plasticity and phase field theories for modeling grain refinement. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 123, 953–991

    2022

  2. [10]

    The recrystallization process in some polycrystalline metals

    Bailey, J., Hirsch, P.B., 1962. The recrystallization process in some polycrystalline metals. Pro- ceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences 267, 11–30

    1962

  3. [11]

    Strain induced grain boundary migration in high purity aluminum

    Beck, P.A., Sperry, P.R., 1950. Strain induced grain boundary migration in high purity aluminum. Journal of Applied Physics 21, 150–152

    1950

  4. [12]

    Kinetic equations and level-set approach for simulating solid-state microstruc- ture evolutions at the mesoscopic scale: State of the art, limitations, and prospects

    Bernacki, M., 2024. Kinetic equations and level-set approach for simulating solid-state microstruc- ture evolutions at the mesoscopic scale: State of the art, limitations, and prospects. Progress in Materials Science 142, 101224

    2024

  5. [13]

    Strain induced abnormal grain growth in nickel base superalloys, in: Materials Science Forum, Trans Tech Publ

    Bozzolo, N., Agnoli, A., Souai, N., Bernacki, M., Logé, R.E., 2013. Strain induced abnormal grain growth in nickel base superalloys, in: Materials Science Forum, Trans Tech Publ. pp. 321–324

    2013

  6. [14]

    A new theory of recrystallization nuclei

    Cahn, R., 1950. A new theory of recrystallization nuclei. Proceedings of the Physical Society. Section A 63, 323

    1950

  7. [15]

    A micromechanical approach to inelastic behaviour of metals

    Cailletaud, G., 1992. A micromechanical approach to inelastic behaviour of metals. International Journal of Plasticity 8, 55–73

    1992

  8. [16]

    Crystal plasticity-phase–field based analyses of interfacial microstructural evolution during dynamic recrystallization in a dual phase titanium alloy

    Chatterjee, R., Trivedi, A., Murty, S.N., Alankar, A., 2024. Crystal plasticity-phase–field based analyses of interfacial microstructural evolution during dynamic recrystallization in a dual phase titanium alloy. International Journal of Plasticity 181, 104087

    2024

  9. [17]

    Multiscale modeling of discontinuous dynamic recrystallization during hot working by coupling multilevel cellular automaton and finite element method

    Chen, F., Zhu, H., Chen, W., Ou, H., Cui, Z., 2021. Multiscale modeling of discontinuous dynamic recrystallization during hot working by coupling multilevel cellular automaton and finite element method. International Journal of Plasticity 145, 103064. 30

    2021

  10. [18]

    An integrated fast Fourier transform-based phase-field and crys- tal plasticity approach to model recrystallization of three dimensional polycrystals

    Chen, L., Chen, J., Lebensohn, R., Ji, Y., Heo, T., Bhattacharyya, S., Chang, K., Mathaudhu, S., Liu, Z., Chen, L.Q., 2015. An integrated fast Fourier transform-based phase-field and crys- tal plasticity approach to model recrystallization of three dimensional polycrystals. Co...

    2015

  11. [19]

    A novel computer simulation for modeling grain growth

    Chen, L.Q., 1995. A novel computer simulation for modeling grain growth. Scripta Metallurgica et Materialia;(United States) 32

    1995

  12. [20]

    Discrete dislocation density modelling of single phase FCC polycrystal aggregates

    Cheong, K.S., Busso, E.P., 2004. Discrete dislocation density modelling of single phase FCC polycrystal aggregates. Acta Materialia 52, 5665–5675

    2004

  13. [21]

    A finite element-based simulation of microstructure evolution through a 3d finite strain cosserat phase-field model

    Doghman, J., Bovet, C., Ask, A., 2025. A finite element-based simulation of microstructure evolution through a 3d finite strain cosserat phase-field model. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 439, 117900

    2025

  14. [22]

    Polar field theories, in: Continuum Physics

    Eringen, A.C., Kafadar, C.B., 1976. Polar field theories, in: Continuum Physics. Elsevier, pp. 1–73

    1976

  15. [23]

    Computer simulation of grain growth using a continuum field model

    Fan, D., Chen, L.Q., 1997. Computer simulation of grain growth using a continuum field model. Acta Materialia 45, 611–622. Ferdinand Knipschildt, E.F., 2022. Nucleation of recrystallization. Materials Science and Technol- ogy 38, 765–779

    1997

  16. [24]

    Some links between Cosserat, strain gradient crystal plasticity and the statistical theory of dislocations

    Forest, S., 2008. Some links between Cosserat, strain gradient crystal plasticity and the statistical theory of dislocations. Philosophical Magazine 88, 3549–3563

    2008

  17. [25]

    Cosserat modelling of size effects in the mechanical be- haviour of polycrystals and multi-phase materials

    Forest, S., Barbe, F., Cailletaud, G., 2000. Cosserat modelling of size effects in the mechanical be- haviour of polycrystals and multi-phase materials. International Journal of Solids and Structures 37, 7105–7126

    2000

  18. [26]

    A Cosserat theory for elastoviscoplastic single crystals at finite deformation

    Forest, S., Cailletaud, G., Sievert, R., 1997. A Cosserat theory for elastoviscoplastic single crystals at finite deformation. Archives of Mechanics 49, 705–736

    1997

  19. [27]

    Size effects in Cosserat crystal plasticity, in: Sixty Shades of Generalized Continua: Dedicated to the 60th Birthday of Prof

    Forest, S., Ghiglione, F., 2023. Size effects in Cosserat crystal plasticity, in: Sixty Shades of Generalized Continua: Dedicated to the 60th Birthday of Prof. Victor A. Eremeyev. Springer, pp. 211–234. Gérard, C., Bacroix, B., Bornert, M., Cailletaud, G., Crépin, J., Leclercq...

    2023

  20. [28]

    Cosserat-phase-field modeling of grain nucleation in plastically deformed single crystals

    Ghiglione, F., Ask, A., Ammar, K., Appolaire, B., Forest, S., 2024. Cosserat-phase-field modeling of grain nucleation in plastically deformed single crystals. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids , 105628

    2024

  21. [29]

    A variational approach to two dimensional grain growth—II

    Gill, S., Cocks, A., 1996. A variational approach to two dimensional grain growth—II. Numerical results. Acta Materialia 44, 4777–4789

    1996

  22. [30]

    Grain boundary migration in metals: thermodynamics, kinetics, applications

    Gottstein, G., Shvindlerman, L.S., 2009. Grain boundary migration in metals: thermodynamics, kinetics, applications. CRC press. 31

    2009

  23. [31]

    The Effects of Thermomechanical Pretreatment on Abnormal Grain Growth During Simulated Carburization, in: Heat Treating Conference, ASM International

    Gruich, J., Findley, K., Cryderman, R., 2023. The Effects of Thermomechanical Pretreatment on Abnormal Grain Growth During Simulated Carburization, in: Heat Treating Conference, ASM International. pp. 11–16

    2023

  24. [32]

    Generalized Ginzburg-Landau and Cahn-Hilliard equations based on a micro- force balance

    Gurtin, M.E., 1996. Generalized Ginzburg-Landau and Cahn-Hilliard equations based on a micro- force balance. Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena 92, 178–192

    1996

  25. [33]

    Sharp-interface and phase-field theories of recrystallization in the plane

    Gurtin, M.E., Lusk, M.T., 1999. Sharp-interface and phase-field theories of recrystallization in the plane. Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena 130, 133–154

    1999

  26. [34]

    Polycrystal plasticity with grain boundary evolution: A numerically efficient dislocation-based diffuse-interface model

    He, J., Admal, N.C., 2021. Polycrystal plasticity with grain boundary evolution: A numerically efficient dislocation-based diffuse-interface model. Modelling and Simulation in Materials Science and Engineering 30, 025006

    2021

  27. [35]

    The MFront- GenericInterfaceSupport project

    Helfer, T., Bleyer, J., Frondelius, T., Yashchuk, I., Nagel, T., Naumov, D., 2020. The MFront- GenericInterfaceSupport project. Journal of Open Source Software 5, 1–8

    2020

  28. [36]

    Introducing the open-source mfront code generator: Application to mechanical behaviours and material knowledge management within the PLEIADES fuel element modelling platform

    Helfer, T., Michel, B., Proix, J.M., Salvo, M., Sercombe, J., Casella, M., 2015. Introducing the open-source mfront code generator: Application to mechanical behaviours and material knowledge management within the PLEIADES fuel element modelling platform. Computers & Mathemati...

    2015

  29. [37]

    Orientation-field model for polycrystalline solidification with a singular coupling between order and orientation

    Henry, H., Mellenthin, J., Plapp, M., 2012. Orientation-field model for polycrystalline solidification with a singular coupling between order and orientation. Physical Review B 86, 054117

    2012

  30. [38]

    Simulation of recrystallization by cellular automata

    Hesselbarth, H.W., Göbel, I., 1991. Simulation of recrystallization by cellular automata. Acta Metallurgica et Materialia 39, 2135–2143

    1991

  31. [39]

    Theory of dislocations

    Hirth, J.P., Lothe, J., Mura, T., 1983. Theory of dislocations. Journal of Applied Mechanics 50, 476–477

    1983

  32. [40]

    Spectral phase-field model of deformation twinning and plastic deformation

    Hu, X., Ji, Y., Chen, L., Lebensohn, R.A., Chen, L.Q., Cui, X., 2021. Spectral phase-field model of deformation twinning and plastic deformation. International Journal of Plasticity 143, 103019

    2021

  33. [41]

    Strain-induced abnormal grain growth of Fe foils

    Jin, S., Kang, B., Kong, T., Hong, S.H., Shin, H.J., Ruoff, R.S., 2021. Strain-induced abnormal grain growth of Fe foils. Journal of Alloys and Compounds 853, 157390

    2021

  34. [42]

    A continuum model of grain boundaries

    Kobayashi, R., Warren, J.A., Carter, W.C., 2000. A continuum model of grain boundaries. Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena 140, 141–150

    2000

  35. [43]

    Physics and phenomenology of strain hardening: the FCC case

    Kocks, U., Mecking, H., 2003. Physics and phenomenology of strain hardening: the FCC case. Progress in Materials Science 48, 171–273

    2003

  36. [44]

    Effect of grain structure and strain rate on dynamic recrystallization and deformation behavior: A phase field-crystal plasticity model

    Li, Y., Hu, S., Barker, E., Overman, N., Whalen, S., Mathaudhu, S., 2020. Effect of grain structure and strain rate on dynamic recrystallization and deformation behavior: A phase field-crystal plasticity model. Computational Materials Science 180, 109707

    2020

  37. [45]

    A polycrystal plasticity-cellular automa- ton integrated modeling method for continuous dynamic recrystallization and its application to aa2196 alloy

    Liu, R., Zhang, Z., Zhou, G., Jia, Z., Li, D., Wu, P., 2024. A polycrystal plasticity-cellular automa- ton integrated modeling method for continuous dynamic recrystallization and its application to aa2196 alloy. International Journal of Plasticity 182, 104127. 32

    2024

  38. [46]

    Combining microstructural character- ization with crystal plasticity and phase-field modelling for the study of static recrystallization in pure aluminium

    Luan, Q., Lee, J., Zheng, J.H., Hopper, C., Jiang, J., 2020. Combining microstructural character- ization with crystal plasticity and phase-field modelling for the study of static recrystallization in pure aluminium. Computational Materials Science 173, 109419

    2020

  39. [47]

    Kinetics and anisotropy of the Monte Carlo model of grain growth

    Mason, J., Lind, J., Li, S., Reed, B., Kumar, M., 2015. Kinetics and anisotropy of the Monte Carlo model of grain growth. Acta Materialia 82, 155–166

    2015

  40. [48]

    Initial grain orientation controls static recrystallization outcomes in cold-worked iron: Insight from coupled crystal plasticity/vertex dynamics modeling

    McElfresh, C., Marian, J., 2023. Initial grain orientation controls static recrystallization outcomes in cold-worked iron: Insight from coupled crystal plasticity/vertex dynamics modeling. Acta Materialia 245, 118631

    2023

  41. [49]

    Some geometrical relations in dislocated crystals

    Nye, J.F., 1953. Some geometrical relations in dislocated crystals. Acta Metallurgica 1, 153–162

    1953

  42. [50]

    Cellular automata in materials science with particular reference to recrystalliza- tion simulation

    Raabe, D., 2002. Cellular automata in materials science with particular reference to recrystalliza- tion simulation. Annual Review of Materials Research 32, 53–76

    2002

  43. [51]

    Recovery and recrystallization: phenomena, physics, models, simulation

    Raabe, D., 2014. Recovery and recrystallization: phenomena, physics, models, simulation. Physical Metallurgy , 2291–2397

    2014

  44. [52]

    Nucleation and growth during recrystallization

    Rios, P.R., Siciliano Jr, F., Sandim, H.R.Z., Plaut, R.L., Padilha, A.F., 2005. Nucleation and growth during recrystallization. Materials Research 8, 225–238

    2005

  45. [53]

    Recrystallization and Related Annealing Phenom- ena

    Rollett, A., Rohrer, G.S., Humphreys, J., 2017. Recrystallization and Related Annealing Phenom- ena. Newnes

    2017

  46. [54]

    A new numerical framework for the full field modeling of dynamic recrystallization in a CPFEM context

    Sarrazola, D.R., Muñoz, D.P., Bernacki, M., 2020b. A new numerical framework for the full field modeling of dynamic recrystallization in a CPFEM context. Computational Materials Science 179, 109645. Sedláček, R., Blum, W., Kratochvil, J., Forest, S., 2002. Subgrain formation d...

    2002

  47. [55]

    Phase-field model for anisotropic grain growth

    Staublin, P., Mukherjee, A., Warren, J.A., Voorhees, P.W., 2022. Phase-field model for anisotropic grain growth. Acta Materialia 237, 118169

    2022

  48. [56]

    Multi phase field model for solid state transformation with elastic strain

    Steinbach, I., Apel, M., 2006. Multi phase field model for solid state transformation with elastic strain. Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena 217, 153–160

    2006

  49. [57]

    A generalized field method for multiphase transformations using interface fields

    Steinbach, I., Pezzolla, F., 1999. A generalized field method for multiphase transformations using interface fields. Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena 134, 385–393

    1999

  50. [58]

    A phase field concept for multiphase systems

    Steinbach, I., Pezzolla, F., Nestler, B., Seeßelberg, M., Prieler, R., Schmitz, G.J., Rezende, J.L., 1996. A phase field concept for multiphase systems. Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena 94, 135–147

    1996

  51. [59]

    Insights into plastic localization by crystallographic slip from emerging experimental and numerical approaches

    Stinville, J., Charpagne, M., Maaß, R., Proudhon, H., Ludwig, W., Callahan, P., Wang, F., Bey- erlein, I., Echlin, M., Pollock, T., 2023. Insights into plastic localization by crystallographic slip from emerging experimental and numerical approaches. Annual Review of Materials...

    2023

  52. [60]

    Static recrystallization simulations starting from predicted deforma- tion microstructure by coupling multi-phase-field method and finite element method based on crystal plasticity

    Takaki, T., Tomita, Y., 2010. Static recrystallization simulations starting from predicted deforma- tion microstructure by coupling multi-phase-field method and finite element method based on crystal plasticity. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 52, 320–328

    2010

  53. [61]

    Phase-field model during static recrys- tallization based on crystal-plasticity theory

    Takaki, T., Yamanaka, A., Higa, Y., Tomita, Y., 2007. Phase-field model during static recrys- tallization based on crystal-plasticity theory. Journal of Computer-Aided Materials Design 14, 75–84

    2007

  54. [62]

    A multi-physics model for the evolution of grain microstructure

    Tandogan, I.T., Budnitzki, M., Sandfeld, S., 2025. A multi-physics model for the evolution of grain microstructure. International Journal of Plasticity 185, 104201

    2025

  55. [63]

    Reconciling grain growth and shear-coupled grain boundary migration

    Thomas, S.L., Chen, K., Han, J., Purohit, P.K., Srolovitz, D.J., 2017. Reconciling grain growth and shear-coupled grain boundary migration. Nature Communications 8, 1764

    2017

  56. [64]

    Phase-field modeling of microstructure evolution: Recent applications, perspectives and challenges

    Tourret, D., Liu, H., LLorca, J., 2022. Phase-field modeling of microstructure evolution: Recent applications, perspectives and challenges. Progress in Materials Science 123, 100810

    2022

  57. [65]

    Stochastic model- ing of discontinuous dynamic recrystallization at finite strains in hcp metals

    Tutcuoglu, A.D., Vidyasagar, A., Bhattacharya, K., Kochmann, D.M., 2019. Stochastic model- ing of discontinuous dynamic recrystallization at finite strains in hcp metals. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 122, 590–612

    2019

  58. [66]

    Grain boundary mobility during recrystallization of copper

    Vandermeer, R., Jensen, D.J., Woldt, E., 1997. Grain boundary mobility during recrystallization of copper. Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A 28, 749–754

    1997

  59. [67]

    Extending phase field models of solidification to polycrystalline materials

    Warren, J.A., Kobayashi, R., Lobkovsky, A.E., Carter, W.C., 2003. Extending phase field models of solidification to polycrystalline materials. Acta Materialia 51, 6035–6058

    2003

  60. [68]

    Structure-energy correlation for grain boundaries in FCC metals—III

    Wolf, D., 1990. Structure-energy correlation for grain boundaries in FCC metals—III. Symmetrical tilt boundaries. Acta Metallurgica et Materialia 38, 781–790

    1990

  61. [69]

    Analysis and characterization of dynamic recrystallization and grain structure evolution in friction stir welding of aluminum plates

    Yu, P., Wu, C., Shi, L., 2021. Analysis and characterization of dynamic recrystallization and grain structure evolution in friction stir welding of aluminum plates. Acta Materialia 207, 116692

    2021

  62. [70]

    An integrated full-field model of concurrent plastic deformation and microstructure evolution: Application to 3D simulation of dynamic recrystallization in polycrystalline copper

    Zhao, P., Low, T.S.E., Wang, Y., Niezgoda, S.R., 2016. An integrated full-field model of concurrent plastic deformation and microstructure evolution: Application to 3D simulation of dynamic recrystallization in polycrystalline copper. International Journal of Plasticity 80, 38–55. 34

    2016

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.