Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

A statistical theory for polymer elasticity: from molecular kinematics to continuum behavior

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper derives a micro-macro relation in which a polymer chain segment's logarithmic stretch equals the projection of the Eulerian logarithmic strain onto the segment's current direction, giving a two-parameter hyperelastic law.

desk verdict Solid statistical-mechanics framework with a real empirical punch, but the headline claim that the kinematic mapping is derived rather than assumed overstates Eq. (14). read the letter →

arxiv 2507.02361 v1 pith:R4UD6DDX submitted 2025-07-03 cond-mat.soft cond-mat.stat-mech

Lin Zhan , Siyu Wang , Rui Xiao , Shaoxing Qu , Paul Steinmann This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.softcond-mat.stat-mech MSC 74B2082D6074A25 PACS 83.80.Va62.20.D
keywords polymerelasticityhyperelasticityfreelyjointedchainmicro-macrotransitionEulerianlogarithmicstrainvirialstressorientationprobabilityrubber
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

This paper tries to derive, rather than assume, how the microscopic stretch and orientation of polymer chain segments connect to macroscopic deformation. Starting from a freely jointed chain and a new segment-level Hamiltonian, it obtains the relation $\ln\lambda = \mathbf{h}:\mathbf{u}\otimes\mathbf{u}$, meaning the logarithmic stretch of a segment pointing in spatial direction $\mathbf{u}$ equals the projection of the macroscopic Eulerian logarithmic strain $\mathbf{h}$ onto that direction. The orientation probability of segments is then computed from the same Hamiltonian through statistical mechanics, and averaging the segment free energy over that probability gives a continuum stress-strain law $W = \rho N \int P(\mathbf{u}) F(\lambda)\,d\mathbf{u}$ with only two physical parameters, $\rho k_B T$ and $N$. If correct, the theory would replace the affine deformation assumption with a thermodynamically grounded micro-macro bridge and improve predictions of elastomer response across uniaxial, biaxial, and pure-shear loadings.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the segment-level Hamiltonian $\tilde{G}(\lambda) = F(\lambda) - (\partial F/\partial\ln\lambda)\ln\lambda$, obtained by a Legendre transformation so that $\ln\lambda$ acts as the extensive variable and $f\tilde{b}$ as its conjugate generalized force. Combined with the virial stress identity and the stationarity of $W - \boldsymbol{\sigma}:\mathbf{h}$, this Hamiltonian yields the logarithmic micro-macro relation $\ln\lambda = \mathbf{h}:\mathbf{u}\otimes\mathbf{u}$; the orientation distribution $P(\mathbf{u})\propto e^{-\tilde{G}/k_BT}$ is then the equilibrium probability for a segment in direction $\mathbf{u}$. These two ingredients convert single-chain statistical mechanics into a continuum strain-energy density $W = \rho N\int P(\mathbf{u}) F(\lambda)\,d\mathbf{u}$.

What would settle it

Measure the average logarithmic stretch of chain segments whose current directions fall in a small cone around a given spatial direction while a known biaxial deformation is applied. If the measured stretch departs from the projection $\mathbf{h}:\mathbf{u}\otimes\mathbf{u}$ by more than thermal scatter, the central kinematic relation is falsified; a separate check is to compare the predicted orientation distribution $P(\mathbf{u})$ with the measured distribution, since both derive from the same segment Hamiltonian.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is a Eulerian micro-macro mapping: for a chain segment whose equilibrium orientation is the spatial unit vector $\mathbf{u}$, the segment stretch is fixed by $\ln\lambda = \mathbf{h}:\mathbf{u}\otimes\mathbf{u}$, where $\mathbf{h} = \ln(\mathbf{F}\cdot\mathbf{F}^{T})/2$ is the Eulerian logarithmic strain, and the probability of finding a segment in direction $\mathbf{u}$ is $P(\mathbf{u})\propto e^{-\tilde{G}/k_BT}$, with $\tilde{G} = F - (\partial F/\partial\ln\lambda)\ln\lambda$ the segment Hamiltonian under the generalized force $f\tilde{b}$. The derivation passes through the virial expression for the Cauchy stress, $\boldsymbol{\sigma} = \rho N\langle f\tilde{b}\,\mathbf{u}\otimes\mathbf{u}\rangle - p\mathbf{I}$, and the requirement that the Legendre-transformed free energy density $W - \boldsymbol{\sigma}:\mathbf{h}$ be stationary. The authors argue that this gives chain kinematics and orientation directly from thermodynamic observables, with no affine or prescribed-orientation assumption, and that the resulting hyperelastic law reproduces uniaxial, biaxial, and pure-shear data for vulcanized rubber and PDMS with only $\rho k_BT$ and $N$ as material parameters.

Load-bearing premise

The whole construction rests on the assumption that a chain segment's logarithmic stretch is exactly the projection of the macroscopic logarithmic strain onto its current direction; the paper shows this condition is sufficient for equilibrium but does not prove it is the only possible relation.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The usual assumption that chains deform exactly like continuum line elements becomes unnecessary: chain stretch and orientation both come from the same segment Hamiltonian and the logarithmic strain, so no separate prescription of chain rotation or initial orientation is needed.
  • Longer chains (larger $N$) orient less under a given deformation because the segment energy $\tilde{G}$ decreases with $N$; an infinitely long chain would remain essentially isotropic.
  • In the small-to-moderate strain or large-$N$ limit the segment energy is nearly isotropic and the model reduces to Gaussian-type behavior, matching PDMS multiaxial data with $\rho k_BT = 0.160$ MPa.
  • With only two parameters, the theory ranks fifth among 44 hyperelastic models on classic vulcanized-rubber data when calibrated on uniaxial tension alone, and the four models ranked above it all use a third parameter.
  • The orientation probability is independent of temperature at fixed deformation, because a higher temperature requires a higher stress to sustain the same orientation; thermal isotropization enters through the stress level rather than explicitly through $T$.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: because the micro-macro mapping is Eulerian, it should be straightforward to generalize the theory to polydisperse networks by weighting $P(\mathbf{u})$ over a chain-length distribution; rupture and damage predictions would then differ from Lagrangian models because chains are not tracked from an initial orientation.
  • Editorial inference: the appearance of the logarithmic strain at the micro-macro step hints at a formal link to phenomenological logarithmic strain-energy functions; deriving a known strain-energy invariant from $W$ would make that link explicit and testable.
  • Editorial inference: the kinematic relation $\ln\lambda = \mathbf{h}:\mathbf{u}\otimes\mathbf{u}$ can be tested directly in coarse-grained simulations by binning segments by current direction and comparing their mean logarithmic stretch with the projection; this would isolate the kinematic rule from the thermodynamic derivation that produces it.
  • Editorial inference: since the paper only establishes this relation as a sufficient condition for stationarity, the predictive success may be tied to this particular choice; checking alternative sufficient stretch-orientation rules against the same data would clarify what the Hamiltonian adds beyond the kinematic form.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

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. This paper proposes a statistical-mechanical theory of polymer elasticity in which each chain is coarse-grained into N orientable segments and the network is treated as an ensemble of nN independent segments. The central result is the micro-macro relation ln λ = h : u ⊗ u, which links the logarithmic stretch of a chain segment oriented along u to the Eulerian logarithmic strain h of the continuum. With this relation, the orientation distribution P(u) is obtained from a new segment Hamiltonian G̃, and the stress response follows from W = ρN ∫ P F(λ) du. The two parameters ρkBT and N are calibrated on uniaxial tension data, and the model is then used to predict equibiaxial, pure shear, uniaxial compression, and biaxial responses for Treloar's vulcanized rubber and for PDMS networks. The paper reports favorable out-of-sample predictions and a fifth-place ranking among 44 hyperelastic models in an existing benchmark.

Significance. If the central derivation were fully supported, the model would offer a conceptually new Eulerian statistical framework for rubber elasticity that avoids Lagrangian affine assumptions and uses only two physically meaningful parameters. The paper's strengths are its transparent construction, the coherent algebra leading to the virial stress expression, and the genuinely out-of-sample character of the biaxial predictions: ρkBT and N are calibrated on uniaxial tension only, and biaxial, compression, and pure shear responses are predicted without further fitting. The quantitative comparison in Appendix A, including the benchmark against the 44 models of Dal et al., gives independent evidence that the proposed micro-macro relation is empirically competitive. The final constitutive formulas are explicit and reproducible.

major comments (3)
  1. [Eqs. (13)-(14) and Abstract] The micro-macro mapping ln λ = h : u ⊗ u is introduced in the text as 'a sufficient condition' for the stationarity condition (13), but the abstract and conclusions present it as retrieved from thermodynamics without phenomenological assumptions. This overstates the mathematical content: Eq. (13) is an integral condition over the unit sphere, and only the symmetric traceless part of ∫ P f b̃ (∂ln λ/∂h - u ⊗ u) du must vanish. Pointwise vanishing of the integrand is sufficient but not necessary. Functions of the form ln λ = h : u ⊗ u + c(u) satisfy the pointwise differential condition as well, and other non-pointwise forms could satisfy the moment condition; the paper does not prove that Eq. (14) is the unique minimizer. The authors should either provide a rigorous necessity proof under explicitly stated assumptions or explicitly reframe Eq. (14) as a constitutive ansatz that is validated by the out-of-sample comparisons.
  2. [Eqs. (10), (13) and the paragraph after Eq. (14)] The stationarity condition (13) is the macroscopic equilibrium condition with respect to h for a fixed orientation distribution. The full thermodynamic potential G = W - σ : h - T S̃ should also be stationary with respect to the microstructural stretch field λ(u) at fixed h; the paper does not verify the condition δG/δλ = 0. The relation ∂G/∂P = 0 built into Eq. (9) fixes P for a given λ, but it does not determine λ independently. Consequently, Eq. (14) is not shown to be the minimizer of the thermodynamic potential, contrary to the claim that the kinematics are derived from thermodynamics. The authors should either verify the micro-level stationarity condition or state explicitly that λ(u) is not an independent degree of freedom and is therefore an assumed kinematic rule.
  3. [Eqs. (7)-(9) and Table 1] The construction from a single chain to a network of nN independent segments is itself a modeling assumption: the paper states that segments are independent with weak interactions and that crosslink junction fluctuations are fully represented by the orientation probability P(u). This is physically reasonable but not a derivation from first principles. Therefore the phrase 'without phenomenological assumptions' in the abstract is too strong, regardless of the status of Eq. (14). The text should distinguish assumptions that are constitutive choices from results that are derived from those choices.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Eq. (6)] The formula for f writes the unit vector as b̃/b̃, which is ambiguous because b̃ is itself a vector. Please use a dedicated unit-vector notation, for example b̂ or b̃/|b̃|.
  2. [Eq. (7)] The Legendre transformation line contains a sign error: since b̃ = -∂G/∂f, the Helmholtz energy should be F = G - (∂G/∂f)·f, equivalently F = G + f·b̃, not F = G + (∂G/∂f)·f. The final expression in Eq. (7) is correct, so this appears to be a typographical sign error in the derivation rather than a substantive error.
  3. [Gaussian reduction paragraph after Eq. (15)] The small-deformation expression for G̃ has a sign error. For the Gaussian limit F = (3/2)kT(λ/√N)^2, one obtains G̃ = F - ∂F/∂lnλ lnλ = (3/2)kT(λ/√N)^2(1 - 2lnλ), not (3/2)kT(λ/√N)^2(1/2 + lnλ). The argument that G̃ is small for large N is unaffected, but the formula should be corrected.
  4. [Fig. 3 caption] The caption reports ρkBT = 0.160 MPa but does not state the value of N used for the PDMS data. If the Gaussian limit with large N is being used, this should be stated explicitly so that the reader knows whether the model is effectively one-parameter in that comparison.
  5. [Appendix A, Tables I and II] The calibrated parameters differ between the two tables (ρkBT = 0.99 MPa, N = 146 in Table I versus ρkBT = 1.03 MPa, N = 149 in Table II). The text should state explicitly that the objective function changes from average relative error in Eq. (16) to squared error in Eq. (17), because this explains the parameter difference and prevents the appearance of inconsistency.
  6. [Throughout] The symbol G is used for the segment Gibbs energy (Eq. 4), the augmented network free energy (Eq. 10), and the network Gibbs energy density (Eq. 25). Please distinguish these quantities typographically, for example by using G_seg, G_aug, and G_net. The paper also contains several typographical errors, including 'intergration', 'quantative', 'phenomenonlogical', 'Halmiltonian', and 'Trealoar'.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

Only minor circularity: Eq. (14) is an imposed sufficient condition for Eq. (13), not a derived necessity; the out-of-sample stress predictions remain independent.

  1. self definitional [Section 'The polymer network', Eqs. (13)-(14)]
    "the minimum condition in the isothermal case becomes δ (W − σ : h) = ρN ∫ P f ˜b ( ∂ ln λ ∂h − u ⊗ u ) : δh du = 0, (13), which requires ln λ = h : u ⊗ u, (14), as a sufficient condition."

    Equation (13) is an integral stationarity condition: it only forces the orientation-averaged tensor integral to vanish for every constant δh. The paper selects the pointwise solution ∂lnλ/∂h = u⊗u, i.e., lnλ = h:u⊗u, and labels it as what the condition 'requires'. This is a sufficient condition, not a necessary consequence, so the micro-macro relation is imposed to make the variational principle hold trivially rather than retrieved from it. The abstract's claim that chain kinematics are 'retrieved by the thermodynamic observables without phenomenological assumptions' therefore presents a chosen ansatz as a derived result.

full rationale

The model parameters ρkBT and N are calibrated on uniaxial tension data and then used to predict equibiaxial, pure shear, and compression responses, so those benchmark comparisons are genuine predictions rather than fitted outputs. Self-citations to the authors' earlier Biot-chain model [17] appear only as a comparison baseline and as a statement that the neo-Hookean model is a limiting case; they are not load-bearing for the central derivation. The main reservation is Eq. (14): it is introduced as a pointwise sufficient condition for the integral stationarity condition Eq. (13), not as a necessary consequence. This makes the abstract's 'retrieved without phenomenological assumptions' wording an overstatement and gives the central micro-macro relation a partially self-imposed character, but it does not reduce the predicted stress-strain responses to the calibrated parameters. Overall circularity is minor, warranting a score of 2.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The framework rests on standard freely jointed chain statistics plus several modeling choices. The most consequential is the selection of the pointwise micro-macro relation as a sufficient condition for stationarity. No new physical entities are posited, so invented_entities is empty. Two numerical parameters, rho kBT and N, are fitted to uniaxial data; their values differ between datasets and are not independently measured.

free parameters (2)
  • rho kBT (chain density times thermal energy) = 0.99 MPa (Treloar); 0.160 MPa (PDMS)
    Fitted to uniaxial tension data; sets the overall stress magnitude.
  • N (number of Kuhn segments per chain) = 146 (Treloar); Gaussian limit for PDMS fit
    Fitted to uniaxial tension data; controls orientation anisotropy and nonlinearity.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Freely jointed chain: each segment is a rigid rod of length b, independent and ergodic on a sphere; the free end-to-end distance is r0 = sqrt(N) b.
    Used in Eqs. (1)-(5) to derive the single-chain Helmholtz energy F(lambda); this is the standard FJC model.
  • ad hoc to paper The network is an ensemble of nN independent, weakly interacting segments, and crosslink junction fluctuations are fully represented by the orientation probability P(u).
    Stated near Eqs. (9)-(10) and in the conclusion; the paper assumes no additional junction degrees of freedom are needed.
  • domain assumption Deformation is volume-preserving/incompressible: n and V are conserved, tr h = 0, and the kinetic term in the virial stress contributes only an isotropic pressure pI.
    Used around Eqs. (12)-(13); standard for elastomers.
  • ad hoc to paper The stationarity condition delta(W - sigma : h) = 0 is satisfied by the sufficient, pointwise condition partial ln lambda / partial h = u tensor u, i.e. ln lambda = h : u tensor u (Eq. 14).
    The paper does not prove this is the necessary minimizer; this choice is load-bearing for all subsequent predictions.
  • ad hoc to paper The new conjugate pair (f b-tilde, ln lambda) defines a single-segment Hamiltonian G-tilde = F - f b-tilde ln lambda, and the segment orientation follows a Boltzmann distribution P proportional to exp(-G-tilde / kBT).
    This is the novel statistical construction of the paper; treating G-tilde as the relevant Hamiltonian for orientation is a modeling assumption, not a strict theorem.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A statistical theory for polymer elasticity: from molecular kinematics to continuum behavior." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/R4UD6DDX

@misc{pith2026250702361,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A statistical theory for polymer elasticity: from molecular kinematics to continuum behavior},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/R4UD6DDX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.02361}
}
read the original abstract

Predicting the macroscopic mechanical behavior of polymeric materials from the micro-structural features has remained a challenge for decades. Existing theoretical models often fail to accurately capture the experimental data, due to non-physical assumptions that link the molecule kinematics with the macroscopic deformation. In this work, we construct a novel Hamiltonian for chain segments enabling a unified statistical description of both individual macromolecular chains and continuum polymer networks. The chain kinematics, including the stretch and orientation properties, are retrieved by the thermodynamic observables without phenomenological assumptions. The theory shows that the chain stretch is specified by a simple relation via its current spatial direction and the continuum Eulerian logarithmic strain, while the probability of a chain in this spatial direction is governed by the new Hamiltonian of a single segment. The model shows a significantly improved prediction on the hyperelastic response of elastomers, relying on minimal, physically-grounded parameters.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.02361 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: (a) A sketch for the freely jointed chain subject to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: Chain anisotropy in uniaxial tension with order [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: Comparing the experimental data [46] and predicted [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Comparing the predicted stress-stretch responses in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. On the statistical physics and thermodynamics of polymer networks: a Eulerian theory for entropic elasticity

    cond-mat.soft 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A maximum-entropy treatment of polymer segments yields a two-parameter hyperelastic model with explicit chain orientation probabilities and a predicted equal-biaxial instability.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 56 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [11]

    Paul and R

    J. Paul and R. John, Statistical mechanics of cross-linked poly- mer networks. i. rubberlike elasticity, J Chem Phys 11, 512 (1943)

    work page 1943

  2. [17]

    A. Anssari-Benam, Large isotropic elastic deformations: on a comprehensive model to correlate the theory and experiments for incompressible rubber-like materials, Journal of Elasticity 153, 219 (2023)

    work page 2023

  3. [1]

    Kinematics: F = ∂x ∂X , h = ln F · FT 2

    work page

  4. [2]

    Micro-macro mapping: λ (u) =eh:u⊗u

    work page

  5. [3]

    Helmholtz energy of a segment: F(λ ) =kBT λ β√ N + ln β sinh β , β = L −1 λ√ N

    work page

  6. [4]

    Probability of a segment/chain in the direction u: P(u) = e− ˜G/kBT R |u|=1 e− ˜G/kBT du , ˜G = F − ∂F ∂ λ λ ln λ

    work page

  7. [5]

    UT only fit (Treloar)

    Continuum stress-strain relation: W = ρN Z |u|=1 P(u) · F(λ )du, σ = ∂W ∂h + pI. To quantify chain anisotropy, we can define an order pa- rameter tensor [34] as A = ⟨u ⊗ u⟩ − 1 3I. The alignment to a specified direction n can be characterized by a scalar order parameter as An = 3 2n · A · n = 3 2 Z |u|=1 P(u) · (u · n)2du − 1 2 . (15) The bounds of An are...

    work page

  8. [6]

    H. M. James and E. Guth, Theory of the elastic properties of rubber, The Journal of Chemical Physics 11, 455 (1943)

    work page 1943

Show all 56 references
  1. [7]

    Ortiz and G

    C. Ortiz and G. Hadziioannou, Entropic elasticity of single polymer chains of poly (methacrylic acid) measured by atomic force microscopy, Macromolecules 32, 780 (1999)

    1999

  2. [8]

    Heussinger, M

    C. Heussinger, M. Bathe, and E. Frey, Statistical mechanics of semiflexible bundles of wormlike polymer chains, Physical re- view letters 99, 048101 (2007)

    2007

  3. [9]

    W. Di, X. Gao, W. Huang, Y . Sun, H. Lei, Y . Liu, W. Li, Y . Li, X. Wang, M. Qin, et al., Direct measurement of length scale dependence of the hydrophobic free energy of a single collapsed polymer nanosphere, Physical Review Letters 122, 047801 (2019)

    2019

  4. [10]

    M. R. Buche and M. N. Silberstein, Statistical mechanical con- stitutive theory of polymer networks: The inextricable links be- tween distribution, behavior, and ensemble, Physical Review E 102, 012501 (2020)

    2020

  5. [12]

    M. C. Wang and E. Guth, Statistical theory of networks of non- gaussian flexible chains, The Journal of Chemical Physics 20, 1144 (1952)

    1952

  6. [13]

    E. M. Arruda and M. C. Boyce, A three-dimensional constitu- tive model for the large stretch behavior of rubber elastic ma- terials, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 41, 389 (1993)

    1993

  7. [14]

    H. Dal, O. G ¨ultekin, and K. Ac ¸ıkg¨oz, An extended eight-chain model for hyperelastic and finite viscoelastic response of rub- berlike materials: Theory, experiments and numerical aspects, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 145, 104159 (2020)

    2020

  8. [15]

    Grasinger, Polymer networks which locally rotate to accom- modate stresses, torques, and deformation, Journal of the Me- chanics and Physics of Solids 175, 105289 (2023)

    M. Grasinger, Polymer networks which locally rotate to accom- modate stresses, torques, and deformation, Journal of the Me- chanics and Physics of Solids 175, 105289 (2023)

    2023

  9. [16]

    H. Dal, K. Ac ¸ıkg¨oz, and Y . Badienia, On the performance of isotropic hyperelastic constitutive models for rubber-like mate- rials: A state of the art review, Applied Mechanics Reviews73, 020802 (2021)

    2021

  10. [18]

    Miehe, S

    C. Miehe, S. G ¨oktepe, and F. Lulei, A micro-macro ap- proach to rubber-like materials—part i: the non-affine micro- sphere model of rubber elasticity, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 52, 2617 (2004)

    2004

  11. [19]

    Tkachuk and C

    M. Tkachuk and C. Linder, The maximal advance path con- straint for the homogenization of materials with random net- work microstructure, Philosophical Magazine 92, 2779 (2012)

    2012

  12. [20]

    Verron and A

    E. Verron and A. Gros, An equal force theory for network mod- els of soft materials with arbitrary molecular weight distribu- tion, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 106, 176 (2017)

    2017

  13. [21]

    V . J. Amores, K. Nguyen, and F. J. Mont ´ans, On the network orientational affinity assumption in polymers and the micro– macro connection through the chain stretch, Journal of the Me- chanics and Physics of Solids 148, 104279 (2021)

    2021

  14. [22]

    L. Zhan, S. Wang, S. Qu, P. Steinmann, and R. Xiao, A new micro–macro transition for hyperelastic materials, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 171, 105156 (2023)

    2023

  15. [23]

    L. G. Treloar, The physics of rubber elasticity, (1975)

    1975

  16. [24]

    Wu and E

    P. Wu and E. Van Der Giessen, On improved network models for rubber elasticity and their applications to orientation hard- ening in glassy polymers, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 41, 427 (1993)

    1993

  17. [25]

    Doi, Soft matter physics (Oxford University Press, USA, 2013)

    M. Doi, Soft matter physics (Oxford University Press, USA, 2013)

    2013

  18. [26]

    F. J. Vernerey, R. Brighenti, R. Long, and T. Shen, Statistical damage mechanics of polymer networks, Macromolecules 51, 9 TABLE II: The relative squared error (RSE) of models predicting Trealoar’s data. Rank of performance

  19. [27]

    model 3 0.2433 4 Davidson-Goulbourne model 3 0.3565 5 Current model ρkBT = 1.03MPa; N = 149 2 0.3736 6609 (2018)

    Models Number of parameters RSEs 1 Extended tube model 3 0.1921 2 Carroll model 3 0.2200 3 Xiang et al. model 3 0.2433 4 Davidson-Goulbourne model 3 0.3565 5 Current model ρkBT = 1.03MPa; N = 149 2 0.3736 6609 (2018)

    2018

  20. [28]

    Truesdell and W

    C. Truesdell and W. Noll, The non-linear field theories of me- chanics (Springer, 2004)

    2004

  21. [29]

    M. C. Boyce and E. M. Arruda, Constitutive models of rubber elasticity: a review, Rubber chemistry and technology 73, 504 (2000)

    2000

  22. [30]

    R. G. Winkler, Equivalence of statistical ensembles in stretch- ing single flexible polymers, Soft Matter 6, 6183 (2010)

    2010

  23. [31]

    J. H. Weiner, Statistical mechanics of elasticity(Courier Corpo- ration, 2012)

    2012

  24. [32]

    Manca, S

    F. Manca, S. Giordano, P. L. Palla, R. Zucca, F. Cleri, and L. Colombo, Elasticity of flexible and semiflexible polymers with extensible bonds in the gibbs and helmholtz ensembles, The Journal of Chemical Physics 136 (2012)

    2012

  25. [33]

    Huang, Statistical mechanics (John Wiley & Sons, 2008)

    K. Huang, Statistical mechanics (John Wiley & Sons, 2008)

    2008

  26. [34]

    X. Xing, P. M. Goldbart, and L. Radzihovsky, Thermal fluctu- ations and rubber elasticity, Physical review letters 98, 075502 (2007)

    2007

  27. [35]

    Tsai, The virial theorem and stress calculation in molecular dynamics, The Journal of Chemical Physics 70, 1375 (1979)

    D. Tsai, The virial theorem and stress calculation in molecular dynamics, The Journal of Chemical Physics 70, 1375 (1979)

    1979

  28. [36]

    A. K. Subramaniyan and C. Sun, Continuum interpretation of virial stress in molecular simulations, International Journal of Solids and Structures 45, 4340 (2008)

    2008

  29. [37]

    N. C. Admal and E. B. Tadmor, A unified interpretation of stress in molecular systems, Journal of elasticity 100, 63 (2010)

    2010

  30. [38]

    Bobrov, S

    V . Bobrov, S. Trigger, and A. Zagorodny, Virial theorem, one- particle density matrix, and equilibrium condition in an external field, Physical Review A 82, 044105 (2010)

    2010

  31. [39]

    Xing, Biaxial deformations of rubber: A comparison be- tween entanglement theory and elastic fluctuation theory, Phys- ical Review E 84, 021801 (2011)

    X. Xing, Biaxial deformations of rubber: A comparison be- tween entanglement theory and elastic fluctuation theory, Phys- ical Review E 84, 021801 (2011)

    2011

  32. [40]

    De Gennes, Short range order effects in the isotropic phase of nematics and cholesterics, Molecular Crystals and Liquid Crys- tals 12, 193 (1971)

    P. De Gennes, Short range order effects in the isotropic phase of nematics and cholesterics, Molecular Crystals and Liquid Crys- tals 12, 193 (1971)

    1971

  33. [41]

    R. R. Netz, Strongly stretched semiflexible extensible polyelec- trolytes and dna, Macromolecules 34, 7522 (2001)

    2001

  34. [42]

    Y . Mao, B. Talamini, and L. Anand, Rupture of polymers by chain scission, Extreme Mechanics Letters 13, 17 (2017)

    2017

  35. [43]

    M. R. Buche, M. N. Silberstein, and S. J. Grutzik, Freely jointed chain models with extensible links, Physical Review E 106, 024502 (2022)

    2022

  36. [44]

    Mulderrig, B

    J. Mulderrig, B. Talamini, and N. Bouklas, A statistical me- chanics framework for polymer chain scission, based on the concepts of distorted bond potential and asymptotic matching, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 174, 105244 (2023)

    2023

  37. [45]

    S. Wang, S. Panyukov, M. Rubinstein, and S. L. Craig, Quanti- tative adjustment to the molecular energy parameter in the lake– thomas theory of polymer fracture energy, Macromolecules52, 2772 (2019)

    2019

  38. [46]

    M. R. Buche and M. N. Silberstein, Chain breaking in the statis- tical mechanical constitutive theory of polymer networks, Jour- nal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids156, 104593 (2021)

    2021

  39. [47]

    Mulderrig, B

    J. Mulderrig, B. Li, and N. Bouklas, Affine and non-affine mi- crosphere models for chain scission in polydisperse elastomer networks, Mechanics of Materials 160, 103857 (2021)

    2021

  40. [48]

    R. Xiao, N. Han, D. Zhong, and S. Qu, Modeling the mechan- ical behaviors of multiple network elastomers, Mechanics of Materials 161, 103992 (2021)

    2021

  41. [49]

    L. M. Araujo, I. Kryven, and L. Brassart, Micromechanical modelling of rubbery networks: The role of chain pre-stretch, International Journal of Non-Linear Mechanics 166, 104834 (2024)

    2024

  42. [50]

    L. Zhan, S. Wang, S. Qu, P. Steinmann, and R. Xiao, A general continuum damage model for soft composites, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 175, 105290 (2023)

    2023

  43. [51]

    L. Zhan, S. Qu, and R. Xiao, A review on the mullins effect in tough elastomers and gels, Acta Mechanica Solida Sinica 37, 181 (2024)

    2024

  44. [52]

    Kawamura, K

    T. Kawamura, K. Urayama, and S. Kohjiya, Multiaxial de- formations of end-linked poly (dimethylsiloxane) networks. 1. phenomenological approach to strain energy density function, Macromolecules 34, 8252 (2001)

    2001

  45. [53]

    L. R. Treloar, Stress-strain data for vulcanized rubber under var- ious types of deformation, Rubber Chemistry and Technology 17, 813 (1944)

    1944

  46. [54]

    A. N. Gent, A new constitutive relation for rubber, Rubber chemistry and technology 69, 59 (1996)

    1996

  47. [55]

    ˙I. D. K ¨ulc¨u, A hyperelastic constitutive model for rubber-like materials, Archive of Applied Mechanics 90, 615 (2020)

    2020

  48. [56]

    Anssari-Benam, A

    A. Anssari-Benam, A. Bucchi, C. O. Horgan, and G. Sacco- mandi, Assessment of a new isotropic hyperelastic constitutive model for a range of rubberlike materials and deformations, 10 Rubber Chemistry and Technology 95, 200 (2022). [51] E. B. Tadmor and R. E. Miller, Modeling m...

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.