PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
October 2, 2025Annales de l Institut Henri Poincaré C Analyse Non Linéaire2 citationsOpen Access

On the effect of geometry on scaling laws for a class of martensitic phase transformations

View Full Paper
JGJanusz GinsterARAngkana RülandATAntonio Tribuzio

Key Points

  • The study illustrates logarithmic losses occur in scaling laws when domain geometry doesn't meet the Hadamard jump condition.
  • A dichotomy exists in scaling laws, where generic domains face logarithmic losses, while specific polygonal domains show optimal scaling.
  • The findings provide insights into the selection principle for optimal isoperimetric domains relevant to phase transformations.
  • Both linearized and nonlinear settings of geometric impacts on scaling laws are explored, indicating broader implications.

Abstract

We study scaling laws for singular perturbation problems associated with a class of two-dimensional martensitic phase transformations and deduce a domain dependence of the scaling law in the singular perturbation parameter. In these settings the respective scaling laws give rise to a selection principle for specific, highly symmetric domain geometries for the associated nucleation microstructure. More precisely, firstly, we prove a general lower bound estimate illustrating that in settings in which the domain and well geometry are incompatible in the sense of the Hadamard jump condition, then necessarily at least logarithmic losses in the singular perturbation parameter occur in the associated scaling laws. Second, for specific phase transformations in two-dimensional settings we prove that this gives rise to a dichotomy involving logarithmic losses in the scaling law for generic domains and optimal linear scaling laws for very specific, highly compatible polygonal domains. In these situations the scaling law thus gives important insight into optimal isoperimetric domains. We discuss both the geometrically linearized and nonlinear settings.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Ginster et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68de84c45b556a9128e1c066https://doi.org/10.4171/aihpc/163
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1On the Effect of Geometry on Scaling Laws for a Class of Martensitic Phase Transformations2024
  2. 2The energy scaling behaviour of singular perturbation models of staircase type in linearized elasticity for higher order laminates2026
  3. 3On the Formation of Microstructure for Singularly Perturbed Problems with Two, Three, or Four Preferred Gradients2024 · 2 citations
  4. 4On the Scaling of the Cubic-to-Tetragonal Phase Transformation with Displacement Boundary Conditions2024 · 1 citations
  5. 5Energy barriers for boundary nucleation in a two-well model without gauge invariance2024 · 1 citations