experiments after the yielding of the material, often accompanied by a necking region where only sacrificial bonds break [@Millereau2018]. We conclude that both the RSN and MS model represent a minimal yet insightful model to study fracture in elastic double networks both at the macroscopic and microscopic level and therefore we can proceed to a more detailed analysis.

\[sec:MacroResponse\] Macroscopic characterization of the failure regimes
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

![image](figure5.eps)

The results in Fig. \[fig:FailureStrain\] clearly demonstrate the dependence of the failure response on the properties of the sacrificial bonds: $\langle \lambda_S \rangle$, and $\mu_M/\mu_S$. To study the joined effect of these properties together with the disorder in the failure threshold ($\delta\lambda$), we construct phase diagrams of the failure response (Fig. \[fig:PhaseDiagram\]) based on the four different regimes described above (see Supplemental Material [@supp]). For each point in the diagram we use a pie-chart symbol indicating the frequency of the four different regimes observed over 50 independent simulations. We first focus on the case with no disorder $\delta\lambda=0$, shown in Fig. \[fig:PhaseDiagram\](a), and observe that both $\mu_M/\mu_S$ and $\lambda_S$ control the sharp transition from the BDT. Also, the BDT of the RSN model coincides with the BDT of the MS model (Eq. \[Da\]) 