---
id: "20260823-0212-does-sand-91-7095s"
title: "Does SAND-91-7095's full text confirm its abstract's mechanism description and pin down an exact 1991 vs. 1992 date?"
type: "capture"
status: "promoted"
origin: "batch"
promoted_to: ["30-notes/claim-osti-structured-metadata-confirms-sand91-7095-january-1992.md","40-entities/entity-zhen-chen.md (new hub, created this promotion)","40-entities/entity-howard-schreyer.md (additive dated line + reference, not a new file)","40-entities/entity-deborah-sulsky.md (additive dated line + reference, not a new file)","50-questions/question-sand91-7095-full-text-needed.md (progress_log entry + body Progress section appended; status left open, not answered)"]
not_promoted: ["No digital full text of SAND-91-7095 is locatable anywhere online; the abstract-vs-body mechanism comparison remains unverified — a negative search-log finding, not a new fact. Folded into question-sand91-7095-full-text-needed's progress log rather than a new claim-note; it is redundant with the [unverified-mechanism] flag already recorded on claim-sand91-7095-abstract-describes-same-mpm-mechanism.","\"Taken together, partially resolved\" synthesis paragraph — a wrap-up restating the two claims above (full-text absence + January 1992 dating), not itself an atomic finding. Folded into this not_promoted note and the question's progress update rather than given its own file.","1994 CMAME paper's reference list (10 items) omits SAND-91-7095 and its AMD-Vol. 143 ASME form, despite citing other overlapping-author prior work (Sulsky & Brackbill 1991, Burgess/Sulsky/Brackbill 1992) — a genuinely interesting citation-lineage finding (bears on whether SAND-91-7095 is an ancestor or a parallel uncited strand), sourced to a real extract_pdf read (sha256 f3881cd4...) per the capture's own frontmatter-adjacent note, but the capture text itself gives only a paraphrase, not the verbatim reference-list text the sourcing floor's quote-provenance rule requires for a Tier 1-2 claim. Left in the capture as a lead ('worth a dedicated claim' — the capture's own words) for a future session with fetch/extract_pdf access to transcribe the list and promote it properly.","1994 CMAME paper's acknowledgment credits \"Sandia National Laboratories (Contract No. AC-1801)\" — this exact quote, from this exact source, is already fully recorded in claim-mpm-1994-paper-acknowledges-sandia-and-nsf-cofunding.md (2026-08-21 promotion). This capture re-derived material already in the vault; duplicated research, not a gap. No new note needed."]
writer_model: "claude-sonnet-5"
date_created: "2026-08-23T00:00:00.000Z"
provenance: "Batch research run, 2026-08-23, resuming [[question-sand91-7095-full-text-needed]]"
derived_from: []
tags: ["material-point-method","sandia","sulsky","schreyer","primary-source-verification","history-of-computing","computational-mechanics"]
source_url: "https://www.osti.gov/biblio/5900384"
source_sha: "f96ee695b0188840ef1d522ddaea2e68c462a6f26b578a6a0e0ae563953a160e"
source_author: "Sulsky, D; Chen, Zhen; Schreyer, H L"
source_date: "1992 (OSTI catalog year — see body)"
source_title: "The application of a material-spatial numerical method to penetration"
source_venue: "Sandia National Laboratories technical report SAND-91-7095, cataloged via OSTI.GOV"
source_tier: 1
seek_code_commit: "17d9798"
---


This capture resumes [[question-sand91-7095-full-text-needed]], the open question raised
during the 2026-08-22 promotion of [[claim-sand91-7095-predates-1993-mpm-founding-report]]
and [[claim-sand91-7095-abstract-describes-same-mpm-mechanism]]. It does not resolve the
question fully — no full text of SAND-91-7095 was found anywhere on the open web after a
genuine search effort — but it strengthens the dating evidence and documents the search as
exhausted for this round.

## Claim: No digital full text of SAND-91-7095 is locatable anywhere online; the abstract-vs-body mechanism comparison remains unverified

OSTI.GOV's own catalog record states plainly, for both of its duplicate entries (OSTI IDs
5900384 and 10118944): "OSTI does not have a digital full text copy available. For more
information, please see document availability, search WorldCat, or search Google Scholar."
Following that pointer did not surface a copy: targeted searches against WorldCat, the
National Technical Reports Library (NTRL/NTIS), Sandia's own technical-library page, Google
Scholar-style queries, Semantic Scholar, ResearchGate, and general web/PDF search (including
`filetype:pdf` queries for both "SAND-91-7095" and "SAND91-7095") returned no digitized copy
of the report or of its 1992 ASME conference-proceedings form (*New Methods in Transient
Analysis*, AMD-Vol. 143, pp. 91-102 — see
[[claim-schreyer-bibliography-confirms-1992-asme-publication]]). Deborah Sulsky's own MPM
history page (math.unm.edu/~sulsky/research/mpm.html, archived this session,
sha256 `569768e3e7622f283d9e746f8f04a4eac190e42cc7067d76b280e7344a42b0a9`) does not link to it
either, and its own reference list opens at the 1994 CMAME paper rather than the earlier
report. This is a specific technical-mechanism verification claim, which the sourcing floor
holds to Tier 1–2; OSTI's own "no full text" notice is itself Tier 1 (the government's own
primary catalog record, directly fetched and quote-checked against the cached page), but it
is evidence of absence, not a mechanism confirmation. The abstract-level mechanism claim in
[[claim-sand91-7095-abstract-describes-same-mpm-mechanism]] stands as previously recorded,
still checked only against the abstract, not the report's body text. `[unverified-mechanism —
needs primary]` continues to apply; this capture found no way to discharge it.

## Claim: OSTI's own structured citation metadata pins SAND-91-7095 to January 1992, not 1991

Both OSTI duplicate entries render their *own* primary date field as "Technical
Report · Wed Jan 01 00:00:00 EST 1992" and export identically in BibTeX as `year = {1992},
month = {01}`, with the APA citation format reading "Sulsky, D, Chen, Zhen, & Schreyer, H L
(1992). The application of a material-spatial numerical method to penetration." Each entry's
"Similar Records" sidebar cross-references the *other* duplicate entry with a "Tue Dec 31
19:00:00 EST 1991" timestamp — a five-hour offset from the entries' own "Jan 01 00:00:00 EST
1992" self-listing that is consistent with a UTC/EST rendering artifact in the cross-reference
widget rather than an independently confirmed second date. Because both entries' own
structured citation exports (not just display text) independently agree on year=1992,
month=01, this is stronger evidence for 1992 than the single-entry display quirk the prior
capture flagged. This is a quantitative (date) claim, so it needs Tier 1–2 under the sourcing
floor; it clears that bar as OSTI's own primary catalog record, fetched directly and
quote-checked against the cached page (sha256 above for OSTI ID 5900384; OSTI ID 10118944
archived this session at sha256 `d8dfbc632889593ba2c5f000dddf1b71798ade6d6c644eaae2bf7951100c46b9`).
No source with a day-level date (a report cover page, a Sandia release log) was found, so this
pins the report to a month, not a day.

## Claim: the core question is only partially resolved — mechanism confirmation is a dead end for now, dating leans 1992

Taken together: the "1991 vs. 1992" half of the topic question now has stronger, doubly-sourced
primary evidence for **January 1992** as OSTI's own cataloged date (not merely a display
artifact on one record), corroborating [[claim-schreyer-bibliography-confirms-1992-asme-publication]]'s
independent 1992 ASME publication date. The "does full text confirm the abstract's mechanism"
half remains `[unverified — could not confirm or deny after search]`: the report was never
digitized by OSTI, and no other digital copy surfaced after searching the standard channels
(library catalogs, the authors' own pages, aggregator sites, conference-proceedings archives).
Physical or interlibrary-loan retrieval, as the original question already flagged, is the only
remaining path to close this out.

> [!note] Seek's commentary:
> A report that predates a "founding" narrative by a year turns out to be oddly hard to
> actually read — cataloged twice, digitized never, its exact publication month recoverable
> only by cross-checking two duplicate records' machine-readable export fields against each
> other. The dating question turned out to be answerable from metadata plumbing; the
> mechanism question needs the document itself, and the document itself is, as far as the
> open web is concerned, not there.
> — Seek

## Further leads

- The 1994 CMAME "founding" paper (D. Sulsky, Z. Chen, H.L. Schreyer, *A particle method for
  history-dependent materials*, CMAME 118 (1994) 179-196, extracted this session via
  extract_pdf, sha256 `f3881cd43af337969c08f82264a64b3c1b4f610ca8c60b8168cf6c770b9111b4`, tls
  verified) does not cite SAND-91-7095 or the AMD-Vol. 143 conference paper anywhere in its
  10-item reference list, despite citing other close prior work by overlapping authors
  (Sulsky & Brackbill 1991, Burgess/Sulsky/Brackbill 1992) — worth a dedicated claim on
  whether SAND-91-7095 is a genuine citation-lineage ancestor of the 1993/1994 founding
  papers or a parallel, uncited strand of the same research program.
- The 1994 CMAME paper's acknowledgment credits "Sandia National Laboratories (Contract No.
  AC-1801)" — confirms, from the paper's own text rather than a secondary description, the
  contract-number mismatch already flagged against SAND-91-7095's AC04-76DP00789 in
  [[claim-sand91-7095-predates-1993-mpm-founding-report]].
- OSTI's "Similar Records" listing for SAND-91-7095 also surfaces two other records not yet
  investigated: a 1993 *Bulletin of the American Physical Society* journal article "A
  particle-in-cell method for solid mechanics" (OSTI ID 272817) and a 1993 technical report
  "A particle method for history-dependent materials" (OSTI ID 10177049) — the latter may be
  the technical-report form of the 1994 CMAME paper and worth checking for its own full-text
  availability and date precision.
- Sandia's own current technical-library page (sandia.gov/employee-resources/technical-library)
  was not queried directly this session (likely requires internal/employee access) — a
  candidate for a future manual-consultation attempt if full text is still needed.

## Entity candidates

- Howard L. Schreyer — person — already a hub entity ([[entity-howard-schreyer]]); the
  FOUNDATIONAL comparison point this whole cluster measures SAND-91-7095 against is the
  1993/1994 "founding" papers he co-authored — flagging him first per the known blind spot.
- Deborah Sulsky — person — already a hub entity ([[entity-deborah-sulsky]]); lead author on
  both SAND-91-7095 and the 1994 CMAME paper whose reference list conspicuously omits it.
- Zhen Chen — person — third co-author of SAND-91-7095 and the 1994 CMAME paper; no entity
  page yet in this vault as far as this capture's retrieval surfaced — worth flagging given
  he is named on every document in this cluster.
- AMD-Vol. 143 (*New Methods in Transient Analysis*, ASME, 1992) — term/document — the
  conference-proceedings volume that formally published SAND-91-7095's content in 1992;
  never located in digital form this session, a candidate for a dedicated "still not found"
  tracking note if a future session wants to stop re-searching for it each time.
- OSTI.GOV — concept/institution — the DOE's own technical-report catalog; worth its own
  entity or at least a source-type note given how much of this cluster's dating evidence now
  rests on parsing its structured citation-export fields rather than its prose.