You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Natural Erosion of Sandstone as Shape Optimisation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scientific Reports, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1038/s41598-017-17777-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Igor Ostanin, Alexander Safonov, Ivan Oseledets |
| Abstract |
Natural arches, pillars and other exotic sandstone formations have always been attracting attention for their unusual shapes and amazing mechanical balance that leave a strong impression of intelligent design rather than the result of a stochastic process. It has been recently demonstrated that these shapes could have been the result of the negative feedback between stress and erosion that originates in fundamental laws of friction between the rock's constituent particles. Here we present a deeper analysis of this idea and bridge it with the approaches utilized in shape and topology optimisation. It appears that the processes of natural erosion, driven by stochastic surface forces and Mohr-Coulomb law of dry friction, can be viewed within the framework of local optimisation for minimum elastic strain energy. Our hypothesis is confirmed by numerical simulations of the erosion using the topological-shape optimisation model. Our work contributes to a better understanding of stochastic erosion and feasible landscape formations that could be found on Earth and beyond. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Russia | 1 | 20% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 32 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 13% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 16% |
| Unknown | 10 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 6 | 19% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 4 | 13% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 19% |
| Unknown | 11 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 45. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 June 2020.
All research outputs
#939,619
of 25,726,194 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#9,853
of 142,648 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,902
of 447,283 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#315
of 4,232 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,726,194 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 142,648 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 447,283 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,232 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.