Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 47 references

Mechanical stability conditions for 3D and 2D crystals under arbitrary load

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read For any 3D or 2D crystal of any symmetry under any load, mechanical stability is decided by the positivity of the Kelvin moduli of the load-corrected stiffness tensor in Mandel notation.

desk verdict Useful Mandel-notation stability compilation, but the paper's own Appendix B contradicts its L-only recipe. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.15918 v2 pith:YHTK5432 submitted 2024-11-24 cond-mat.mtrl-sci cond-mat.mes-hallphysics.comp-ph

Marcin Maździarz This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-scicond-mat.mes-hallphysics.comp-ph MSC 74B0574E10 PACS 62.20.de61.50.Ah
keywords mechanicalstabilityBornKelvinmoduliorthonormal(Mandel)notation2Dmaterialsstressedcrystalselasticcriteria
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 claims that one algorithmic recipe settles mechanical stability for every crystal: 3D or 2D, of any point-group symmetry, stress-free or under arbitrary load. The recipe is to write the fourth-order stiffness tensor together with a stress-dependent correction as a symmetric second-order tensor in orthonormal (Mandel) notation, then check that all its eigenvalues, the Kelvin moduli, are positive. This replaces the current practice of laborious, orientation-dependent lists of principal-minor conditions that differ for each symmetry class and cannot easily handle loaded crystals. If the claim is right, stability analysis becomes a standard numerical eigenproblem that any atomistic or continuum user can run directly from computed elastic constants and the Cauchy stress.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the symmetric second-order tensor L-tilde = C-tilde + H-tilde, assembled from the Mandel-notation images of the stiffness tensor C and of the stress correction H of Eq. (17). Mandel (orthonormal) notation is the map that rewrites a fourth-order stiffness tensor as a real symmetric 6x6 matrix in 3D or 3x3 matrix in 2D, with sqrt(2) factors on the shear entries, so that the matrix entries transform as a genuine second-order tensor; this is what makes the eigenvalues, the Kelvin moduli, orientation-independent, unlike Voigt-notation principal-minor conditions. H carries the explicit stress terms of the Morris-Krenn symmetrized tangent modulus conjugated to Cauchy stress. The argument runs: positive definiteness of the quadratic form delta-epsilon L delta-epsilon is the internal stability condition; L-tilde is symmetric, so Sylvester's criterion is replaced by the equivalent and simpler demand that all its eigenvalues be positive; and for 2D problems those eigenvalues can even be written in closed form via Cardano formulas.

What would settle it

Drive a well-characterized crystal, say biaxially compressed B2 NiAl, through the predicted threshold alpha of about 0.9087 with a finite-strain molecular-dynamics or phonon calculation and watch for the first instability: if a softening mode or bifurcation appears while all Kelvin moduli of L-tilde are still positive, or fails to appear after one has turned negative, the claimed criterion is not the physically operative one. The comparison is concrete because the paper already supplies the stress state and stiffness at the critical stretch.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that internal mechanical stability of a crystal under arbitrary load reduces to one numerical test: positive definiteness of the symmetrized incremental tangent modulus L = C + H of Eq. (17), where C is the stiffness tensor in the current deformed configuration and H is the stress-dependent correction. In Mandel notation this is the statement that all eigenvalues of the 6x6 (or 3x3 in 2D) symmetric matrix L-tilde = C-tilde + H-tilde, called the Kelvin moduli, are positive. Because the Mandel representation maps fourth-order stiffness tensors to genuine second-order tensors while preserving norms, the eigenvalue test is objective: the Kelvin moduli do not depend on the crystal orientation in which the constants were computed, as the three differently oriented NiAl representations in Appendix A demonstrate. The worked analysis of B2 NiAl in Appendix B shows the test in action, with L-tilde becoming singular at stretch alpha of about 1.15454 in biaxial tension and 0.9087 in biaxial compression, while the bare tensor C-tilde alone turns singular respectively slightly earlier and far later, which is why the paper recommends checking both.

Load-bearing premise

The test stands or falls on treating positive definiteness of the symmetrized tangent modulus L = C + H as the correct definition of internal stability under load; competing criteria C, A, and Z are also in circulation, and for a stressed crystal they need not agree.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Stability checking becomes a single numerical eigenproblem: feed the computed elastic constants and the Cauchy stress of the current configuration into L-tilde = C-tilde + H-tilde and test the sign of the smallest eigenvalue, for any material symmetry and any load.
  • The result is objective: because C-tilde and H-tilde are genuine tensors in six- or three-dimensional space, the Kelvin moduli are invariant under rotation of the crystal axes, so calculations in non-conventional or rotated computational cells need no special handling.
  • The same recipe covers 2D crystals with a 3x3 eigenproblem whose eigenvalues can be given in closed form, so two-dimensional materials are handled with the same code path as bulk crystals.
  • Explicit stability inequalities for every 3D symmetry class and every 2D class follow as special cases, unifying the scattered literature conditions, and the accompanying computational notebook turns the check into a routine procedure.
  • For stressed crystals the criterion automatically includes load-induced contributions through H, so pressure-, tension-, and shear-driven instabilities are detected by the same test that governs stress-free crystals.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A next step the paper leaves implicit is to pair the L-tilde Kelvin-modulus test with finite-strain phonon calculations on the same deformed configuration; wherever the two thresholds disagree, that discrepancy itself maps where Born-type mechanical stability and dynamical stability part ways.
  • Because the minimum Kelvin modulus of L-tilde is a smooth scalar function of the deformation, it could double as an order parameter in high-throughput searches or strain-engineering protocols: maximizing the minimum eigenvalue over loading paths is a well-defined target for designing metastable states.
  • The paper's own example hints at a load-direction asymmetry, with C-tilde and L-tilde thresholds nearly coinciding in biaxial tension but differing strongly in compression, suggesting that the choice among the four competing criteria (C, A, Z, L) may itself depend on the loading path; a systematic scan over stress states for a single crystal could test whether the L criterion is always the governi
  • The recipe is zero-temperature and static; extending it to finite temperature through a temperature-dependent effective stiffness tensor would make the Kelvin-modulus criterion a candidate for a unified finite-temperature stability check.
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 algorithmic procedure for testing the mechanical stability of 3D and 2D crystals under arbitrary load. It advocates the use of Mandel (orthonormal) notation, mapping fourth-order stiffness tensors to symmetric second-order tensors and checking the positivity of their eigenvalues, the Kelvin moduli. For stress-free crystals, it recovers explicit stability conditions for all symmetry classes (Appendices C and D). For deformed and stressed crystals, it adopts the incremental tangent modulus L = C + H (Eq. 17) and asserts that positivity of the Kelvin moduli of its Mandel image L tilde is the stability criterion. The manuscript also supplies a Mathematica notebook and an application to NiAl under biaxial deformation (Appendix B).

Significance. If the central claim is correct, the paper provides a practical, coordinate-free stability check that replaces lengthy lists of minorant conditions for stressed crystals of arbitrary symmetry with a single eigenvalue computation. The manuscript is strong in reproducibility: the explicit matrix representations of H tilde in Eqs. (21), (23), (26), and (28) are checkable, a Mathematica notebook is provided, and the stress-free Kelvin-modulus conditions are standard and well established. The main unresolved question is whether the chosen modulus L is the physically relevant tangent modulus for all finite-deformation regimes; the paper does not demonstrate this, and its own example in Appendix B shows that competing criteria differ. The contribution is therefore useful and promising, but the central criterion needs justification or careful reframing.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 4, Eq. (17), and Section 5] The paper's central claim that positivity of the Kelvin moduli of L tilde decides mechanical stability under arbitrary load rests on the unproven premise that L = C + H is the physically correct tangent modulus. The paper itself lists competing criteria C, A, and Z (Section 1) and justifies L only by stating that it is 'among the most stringent' and reproduces observed instabilities, citing Refs. [3,6]. Because the paper explicitly targets finite-deformation states where these criteria differ, as Appendix B demonstrates, this premise is load-bearing. A concrete validation would be to compute phonon spectra or molecular-statics energy second variations along the biaxial paths of Appendix B and to compare the predicted instability thresholds with the C tilde and L tilde criteria. Without such a comparison, the proposed algorithmic check may be evaluating a quadratic form that is not the relevant one for the stated scope.
  2. [Appendix B, Eqs. (B.6)-(B.9), and Section 5] The recommendation in Appendix B is inconsistent with the recipe in Section 5. For biaxial compression the text reports that L tilde becomes singular at alpha = 0.9087 while C tilde alone is not singular, and then recommends 'to check the condition on C tilde as well as on L tilde.' This contradicts the Section 5 statement that positivity of the Kelvin moduli of L tilde indicates mechanical stability. The paper must either adopt a two-criterion check in the conclusions or demonstrate, against a reference such as phonon spectra, that L is the correct criterion and C is not. As written, the reader cannot determine which criterion the paper actually endorses.
  3. [Appendix B, text after Eq. (B.9)] The assertion 'the crystal still remains mechanically stable' at alpha = 0.9087 is not justified. Since L tilde has a zero eigenvalue at this alpha, the Section 5 criterion would place the crystal at the boundary of stability. If the assertion is based on C tilde, it contradicts Section 5; if it is based on phonon or energy data, those data are not shown. This statement needs to be clarified or removed.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Appendix B, Eq. (B.1)] The characters 'alpha > 1' and '0 < alpha < 1' are typeset with non-ASCII symbols ('alpha ¿ 1' and '0 ¡ alpha ¡ 1'); these should be fixed.
  2. [Appendix E, Eq. (E.3)] The denominator for the Reuss bulk modulus is ambiguous; explicit brackets should be added to clarify the division.
  3. [Section 2, Eq. (14)] The norm equivalence for the elasticity tensor is stated without proof; citing the relevant result from Ref. [21] would aid readers who want to verify the isometry.
  4. [Appendix C, orthotropic case] The principal-minor conditions contain superscript notation such as 'C2_12' that is difficult to read; the typesetting of powers and indices should be corrected.
  5. [Section 6] The supplementary material is identified only through Reference [45]; giving the DOI or URL directly in the text would make the notebook easier to locate.
  6. [Abstract and Section 5] The abstract says the paper unifies stability conditions 'under arbitrary load,' but the explicit conditions in Appendices C and D are for stress-free crystals; the wording should distinguish the general Section 5 recipe from the explicit stress-free lists.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the paper's stability conditions are restatements of the adopted L = C + H criterion, with no parameter fitted to the target result and no self-citation chain carrying the derivation.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that mechanical stability under arbitrary load is decided by positive definiteness of L = C + H (Eq. 17), equivalently positivity of the Kelvin moduli of the Mandel-image tensor L-tilde (Sec. 4, Eqs. 19-28). This is a mathematical reformulation, not a circular derivation: positive definiteness of a symmetric matrix is equivalent to positivity of its eigenvalues, as stated around Eqs. 15-18. The criterion L = C + H is imported from independent prior work (Morris-Krenn [3]; Wang et al. [39,40]), not derived from the paper's own conclusions, and the existence of competing criteria C, A, and Z is explicitly acknowledged with citations [4,5]. No parameter is fitted in the paper, and no empirical constant is extracted from its own output. The Appendix B NiAl example uses molecular-statics stiffness data from the author's earlier LAMMPS/EAM work [36], but that is data input for an illustrative calculation, not a load-bearing theoretical premise, and the example is presented as an application, not as proof of the criterion. The self-citations that do occur ([33,35,36,45]) concern data, a comment, and a notebook; they do not justify the stability criterion. The inconsistency noted by the reader between the Section 5 recipe (check L-tilde only) and Appendix B's recommendation to also check C-tilde is a consistency or correctness concern, not a circularity. Overall, the derivation chain is self-contained given the adopted stability criterion, so the circularity score is 0.

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

The paper's central claim rests on externally established domain criteria (the L = C + H internal stability condition) and standard linear algebra (spectral decomposition of symmetric matrices in Mandel notation). No free parameters are fitted and no new entities are introduced. The main assumptions are the choice of the L criterion over competing criteria, hyperelasticity and relaxed-ion conditions, the validity of the Kelvin-modulus eigencheck, and the Cauchy-Born rule in the worked examples.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The incremental symmetrized tangent modulus L = C + H (Eq 17) defines internal stability: positive definiteness of L over all incremental strains is the mechanical stability condition under load.
    Taken from Morris-Krenn [3] and Wang et al. [39,40]; the paper adopts it without proof, and competing criteria C, A, Z exist.
  • domain assumption For stress-free crystals, mechanical stability is equivalent to strict convexity of the strain energy density, i.e., positive definiteness of the stiffness tensor C (Eq 15).
    Classical Born stability; the paper states this in Section 3.
  • standard math Even-order tensors possess a well-posed eigenvalue problem, and the spectral decomposition into Kelvin moduli is valid for any stiffness tensor.
    From Rychlewski [25] and Mehrabadi-Cowin [21]; used throughout Sections 3 and 4.
  • domain assumption The materials considered are hyperelastic with minor and major symmetries of the stiffness tensor, and relaxed-ion configurations are assumed.
    Section 2 and Section 3; the clamped-ion case requires coupled mechanical-phonon analysis [30].
  • domain assumption For the deformation examples, the Cauchy-Born rule applies to relate the applied deformation gradient to the crystal's homogeneous deformation.
    Appendix B; standard but a modeling assumption.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Mechanical stability conditions for 3D and 2D crystals under arbitrary load." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YHTK5432

@misc{pith2026241115918,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Mechanical stability conditions for 3D and 2D crystals under arbitrary load},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YHTK5432}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.15918}
}
read the original abstract

The paper gathers and unifies mechanical stability conditions for all symmetry classes of 3D and 2D materials under arbitrary load. The methodology is based on the spectral decomposition of the fourth-order stiffness tensors mapped to second-order tensors using orthonormal (Mandel) notation, and the verification of the positivity of the so-called Kelvin moduli. An explicit set of stability conditions for 3D and 2D crystals of higher symmetry is also included, as well as a Mathematica notebook that allows mechanical stability analysis for crystals, stress-free and stressed, of arbitrary symmetry under arbitrary loads.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 31 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Born, On the stability of crystal lattices

    M. Born, On the stability of crystal lattices. I, Math. Proc. Camb. Philos. Soc. 36 (2) (1940) 160–172. doi:10.1017/S0305004100017138

    doi:10.1017/s0305004100017138 1940

  2. [2]

    Mouhat, F

    F. Mouhat, F. m. c.-X. Coudert, Necessary and sufficient elastic stability conditions in various crystal systems, Phys. Rev. B 90 (2014) 224104. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.90.224104

    doi:10.1103/physrevb.90.224104 2014

  3. [3]

    J. W. Morris Jr., C. R. Krenn, The internal stability of an elastic solid, Philosophical Magazine A 80 (12) (2000) 2827–2840. doi:10.1080/ 01418610008223897

    work page 2000

  4. [4]

    Clayton, Towards a nonlinear elastic representation of finite compression and instability of boron carbide ceramic, Philosophical Magazine 92 (23) (2012) 2860–2893

    J. Clayton, Towards a nonlinear elastic representation of finite compression and instability of boron carbide ceramic, Philosophical Magazine 92 (23) (2012) 2860–2893. doi:10.1080/14786435.2012.682171

    arXiv 2012

  5. [5]

    C. S. Jog, K. D. Patil, Conditions for the onset of elastic and material instabilities in hyperelastic materials, Archive of Applied Mechanics 83 (5) (2013) 661–684. doi:10.1007/s00419-012-0711-8

    work page doi:10.1007/s00419-012-0711-8 2013

  6. [6]

    Clayton, K

    J. Clayton, K. Bliss, Analysis of intrinsic stability criteria for isotropic third-order Green elastic and compressible neo-Hookean solids, Mechanics of Materials 68 (2014) 104 – 119. doi:10.1016/j.mechmat.2013.08.007

    doi:10.1016/j.mechmat.2013.08.007 2014

  7. [7]

    R. S. Elliott, N. Triantafyllidis, J. A. Shaw, Stability of crystalline solids—I: Continuum and atomic lattice considerations, Journal of the Mechanics and 25 Physics of Solids 54 (1) (2006) 161–192. doi:10.1016/j.jmps.2005.07. 009

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jmps.2005.07 2006

  8. [8]

    R. A. Cowley, Acoustic phonon instabilities and structural phase transi- tions, Phys. Rev. B 13 (1976) 4877–4885. doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.13. 4877

    doi:10.1103/physrevb.13 1976

Show all 47 references
  1. [9]

    G. V. Sin’ko, N. A. Smirnov, Ab initiocalculations of elastic constants and thermodynamic properties of bcc, fcc, and hcp Al crystals under pressure, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 14 (29) (2002) 6989–7005. doi: 10.1088/0953-8984/14/29/301

    2002 doi

  2. [10]

    Wen, C.-Y

    M. Wen, C.-Y. Wang, Lattice stability and the effect of Co and Re on the ideal strength of Ni: First-principles study of uniaxial tensile deformation, Chinese Physics B 26 (9) (2017) 093106. doi:10.1088/1674-1056/26/9/ 093106

    2017 doi

  3. [11]

    J. Nye, P. Nye, Physical Properties of Crystals: Their Representation by Tensors and Matrices, Oxford science publications, Clarendon Press, 1985

    1985

  4. [12]

    Ting, Anisotropic Elasticity: Theory and Applications, Applied Mathe- matics and Engineering Science Texts Series, John Wiley & Sons, Limited, 1992

    T. Ting, Anisotropic Elasticity: Theory and Applications, Applied Mathe- matics and Engineering Science Texts Series, John Wiley & Sons, Limited, 1992

    1992

  5. [13]

    Clayton, Nonlinear Mechanics of Crystals, Solid Mechanics and its Ap- plications, Springer Dordrecht, 2011

    J. Clayton, Nonlinear Mechanics of Crystals, Solid Mechanics and its Ap- plications, Springer Dordrecht, 2011. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-0350-6

    2011 doi

  6. [14]

    Plimpton, Fast Parallel Algorithms for Short-Range Molecular Dy- namics, Journal of Computational Physics 117 (1) (1995) 1 – 19

    S. Plimpton, Fast Parallel Algorithms for Short-Range Molecular Dy- namics, Journal of Computational Physics 117 (1) (1995) 1 – 19. doi: 10.1006/jcph.1995.1039

    1995

  7. [15]

    Singh, L

    S. Singh, L. Lang, V. Dovale-Farelo, U. Herath, P. Tavazohi, F.-X. Coudert, A. H. Romero, MechElastic: A Python Library for Analysis of Mechani- cal and Elastic Properties of Bulk and 2D Materials, Computer Physics Communications (2021) 108068doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2021.108068. 26

    2021

  8. [16]

    Z.-L. Liu, C. Ekuma, W.-Q. Li, J.-Q. Yang, X.-J. Li, ElasTool: An auto- mated toolkit for elastic constants calculation, Computer Physics Commu- nications 270 (2022) 108180. doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2021.108180

    2022

  9. [17]

    Carroll, Must Elastic Materials be Hyperelastic?, Mathematics and Me- chanics of Solids 14 (4) (2009) 369–376

    M. Carroll, Must Elastic Materials be Hyperelastic?, Mathematics and Me- chanics of Solids 14 (4) (2009) 369–376. doi:10.1177/1081286508099385

    2009 doi

  10. [18]

    Hetnarski, J

    R. Hetnarski, J. Ignaczak, The Mathematical Theory of Elasticity, Second Edition, Taylor & Francis, 2010

    2010

  11. [19]

    Blinowski, J

    A. Blinowski, J. Ostrowska-Maciejewska, J. Rychlewski, Two-dimensional Hooke’s tensors - isotropic decomposition, effective symmetry criteria, Archives of Mechanics 48 (2) (1996) 325–345, http://am.ippt.pan.pl/ am/article/view/v48p325

    1996

  12. [20]

    Q. C. He, Q. S. Zheng, On the symmetries of 2D elastic and hyperelas- tic tensors, Journal of Elasticity 43 (3) (1996) 203–225. doi:10.1007/ BF00042501

    1996

  13. [21]

    M. M. Mehrabadi, S. C. Cowin, Eigentensors of linear anisotropic elastic materials, The Quarterly Journal of Mechanics and Applied Mathematics 43 (1) (1990) 15–41. doi:10.1093/qjmam/43.1.15

    1990 doi

  14. [22]

    Morin, P

    L. Morin, P. Gilormini, K. Derrien, Generalized Euclidean Distances for Elasticity Tensors, Journal of Elasticity 138 (2) (2020) 221–232. doi:10. 1007/s10659-019-09741-z

    2020

  15. [23]

    Gao, Q.-J

    J. Gao, Q.-J. Liu, B. Tang, Elastic stability criteria of seven crystal systems and their application under pressure: Taking carbon as an example, Journal of Applied Physics 133 (13) (2023) 135901. doi:10.1063/5.0139232

    2023 doi

  16. [24]

    R. A. Horn, C. R. Johnson, Matrix Analysis, 2nd Edition, Cambridge Uni- versity Press, Cambridge; New York, 2013

    2013

  17. [25]

    Rychlewski, On Hooke’s law, Journal of Applied Mathematics and Me- chanics 48 (3) (1984) 303–314

    J. Rychlewski, On Hooke’s law, Journal of Applied Mathematics and Me- chanics 48 (3) (1984) 303–314. doi:10.1016/0021-8928(84)90137-0. 27

    1984 doi

  18. [26]

    Kowalczyk-Gajewska, J

    K. Kowalczyk-Gajewska, J. Ostrowska-Maciejewska, Review on spectral decomposition of Hooke’s tensor for all symmetry groups of linear elastic material, Engineering Transactions 57 (3-4) (2009) 145–183, http://www. ippt.pan.pl/Repository/o451.pdf

    2009

  19. [27]

    Moakher, A

    M. Moakher, A. N. Norris, The Closest Elastic Tensor of Arbitrary Sym- metry to an Elasticity Tensor of Lower Symmetry, Journal of Elasticity 85 (3) (2006) 215–263. doi:10.1007/s10659-006-9082-0

    2006 doi

  20. [28]

    Thomson, XXI

    W. Thomson, XXI. Elements of a mathematical theory of elasticity, Philo- sophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 146 (1856) 481–498. doi:10.1098/rstl.1856.0022

  21. [29]

    Ogden, Non-linear Elastic Deformations, Dover Civil and Mechanical Engineering, Dover Publications, 1997

    R. Ogden, Non-linear Elastic Deformations, Dover Civil and Mechanical Engineering, Dover Publications, 1997

    1997

  22. [30]

    Grießer, L

    J. Grießer, L. Fr´ erot, J. A. Oldenstaedt, M. H. M¨ user, L. Pastewka, Ana- lytic elastic coefficients in molecular calculations: Finite strain, nonaffine displacements, and many-body interatomic potentials, Phys. Rev. Mater. 7 (2023) 073603. doi:10.1103/PhysRevMaterials.7.073603

    2023 doi

  23. [31]

    Malgrange, C

    C. Malgrange, C. Ricolleau, M. Schlenker, Symmetry and Physical Properties of Crystals, Springer Netherlands, 2014. doi:10.1007/ 978-94-017-8993-6

    2014

  24. [32]

    R. E. Newnham, Properties of Materials: Anisotropy, Symmetry, Structure, Oxford University Press, 2004. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198520757.001. 0001

    2004

  25. [33]

    Ma´ zdziarz, M

    M. Ma´ zdziarz, M. Gajewski, Estimation of Isotropic Hyperelasticity Con- stitutive Models to Approximate the Atomistic Simulation Data for Alu- minium and Tungsten Monocrystals, Computer Modeling in Engineering & Sciences 105 (2) (2015) 123–150. doi:10.3970/cmes.2015.105.123

    2015 doi

  26. [34]

    Chadwick, M

    P. Chadwick, M. Vianello, S. C. Cowin, A new proof that the number of linear elastic symmetries is eight, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of 28 Solids 49 (11) (2001) 2471 – 2492, the Jean-Paul Boehler Memorial Volume. doi:10.1016/S0022-5096(01)00064-3

    2001 doi

  27. [35]

    Ma´ zdziarz, Comment on ’The Computational 2D Materials Database: high-throughput modeling and discovery of atomically thin crystals’, 2D Materials 6 (4) (2019) 048001

    M. Ma´ zdziarz, Comment on ’The Computational 2D Materials Database: high-throughput modeling and discovery of atomically thin crystals’, 2D Materials 6 (4) (2019) 048001. doi:10.1088/2053-1583/ab2ef3

    2019 doi

  28. [36]

    Ma´ zdziarz, S

    M. Ma´ zdziarz, S. Nosewicz, Atomistic investigation of deformation and fracture of individual structural components of metal matrix compos- ites, Engineering Fracture Mechanics 298 (2024) 109953. doi:10.1016/ j.engfracmech.2024.109953

    2024

  29. [37]

    Zhang, R

    S. Zhang, R. Zhang, AELAS: Automatic ELAStic property derivations via high-throughput first-principles computation, Computer Physics Commu- nications 220 (2017) 403 – 416. doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2017.07.020

    2017 doi

  30. [38]

    S. C. Cowin, M. M. Mehrabadi, Anisotropic Symmetries of Linear Elastic- ity, Applied Mechanics Reviews 48 (5) (1995) 247–285. doi:10.1115/1. 3005102

    1995 doi

  31. [39]

    J. Wang, S. Yip, S. R. Phillpot, D. Wolf, Crystal instabilities at finite strain, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71 (1993) 4182–4185. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett. 71.4182

    1993 doi

  32. [40]

    J. Wang, J. Li, S. Yip, S. Phillpot, D. Wolf, Mechanical instabilities of homogeneous crystals, Phys. Rev. B 52 (1995) 12627–12635. doi:10.1103/ PhysRevB.52.12627

    1995

  33. [41]

    Itskov, Tensor Algebra and Tensor Analysis for Engineers, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2007

    M. Itskov, Tensor Algebra and Tensor Analysis for Engineers, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2007. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-16342-0

    2007 doi

  34. [42]

    W. R. Inc., Mathematica, Version 13.1, Champaign, IL, 2022 (2022)

    2022

  35. [43]

    Van Rossum, F

    G. Van Rossum, F. L. Drake, Python 3 Reference Manual, CreateSpace, Scotts Valley, CA, 2009. 29

    2009

  36. [44]

    Bezanson, A

    J. Bezanson, A. Edelman, S. Karpinski, V. B. Shah, Julia: A fresh approach to numerical computing, SIAM Review 59 (1) (2017) 65–98. doi:10.1137/ 141000671

    2017

  37. [45]

    Ma´ zdziarz, Mechanical stability.nb (6 2025)

    M. Ma´ zdziarz, Mechanical stability.nb (6 2025). doi:10.6084/m9. figshare.29356658.v1. URL https://figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/ Mechanical_stability_nb/29356658

    2025

  38. [46]

    Purja Pun, Y

    G. Purja Pun, Y. Mishin, Development of an interatomic potential for the Ni-Al system, Philosophical Magazine 89 (2009) 3245–3267. doi:10.1080/ 14786430903258184

    2009

  39. [47]

    Hackett, Hyperelasticity Primer, Springer Cham, 2018

    R. Hackett, Hyperelasticity Primer, Springer Cham, 2018. doi:10.1007/ 978-3-319-73201-5 . 30

    2018

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.