Some errors in the derivation and printing process in the original article were corrected. Although it was found that the errors have not created significant change in the main conclusions, the details were still given as follows:

Thus, the components of the free energy for the biaxial loading derived from Eq. (25) should be replaced by

Another error was that the data in Ref. 17 were incorrectly used, i.e., experimental nominal stress (strain) was confused with true stress (strain). As a result, given Table 1 should be replaced by new Table 1:

A | C | E | −2C/3E | |
---|---|---|---|---|

Specimen A | 250.0 | 582.0 | −1825 | 0.2126 |

Specimen B | 182.9 | 720.9 | −2208 | 0.2177 |

Specimen C | 211.5 | 719.1 | −3032 | 0.1581 |

Specimen D | 165.8 | 925.8 | −4403 | 0.1402 |

A | C | E | −2C/3E | |
---|---|---|---|---|

Specimen A | 250.0 | 582.0 | −1825 | 0.2126 |

Specimen B | 182.9 | 720.9 | −2208 | 0.2177 |

Specimen C | 211.5 | 719.1 | −3032 | 0.1581 |

Specimen D | 165.8 | 925.8 | −4403 | 0.1402 |

As shown in Figs. 1–3, no significant change compared with the results in the original article and the conclusions in the original paper still match with the revised figures.

Compared with the equations in the original article, some integral symbols should be added in Eqs. (5) and (6), the sign before *SdT* in Eq. (6) should be plus and the first part of Eq. (15) should have a superscript *T* instead *p*. All errors above have no effect on the subsequent derivation.

## Acknowledgments for this Erratum

Dr. Wan X. J helped the authors to obtain the data and check the results. This work was financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China through the key research project (Grant Nos. 11832019, 11472313, and 13572355).