MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W111407429

Characteristics of porous nickel-titanium alloys for medical applications.

2002· article· en· W111407429 on OpenAlexaff
Stéfania Polizu, S. Turenne, L’H. Yahia

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicShape Memory Alloy Transformations
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNickel titaniumPorosityMaterials scienceShape-memory alloyAusteniteNickelMartensiteCompatibility (geochemistry)Composite materialMetallurgyMicrostructure
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate the behavior of NiTi porous alloys, possessing the property of shape memory, by using different characterization methods XPS, Auger, DSC and SEM. The study mainly focuses on the determination of porosity, surface characteristics and the phase transformation. In the case of porous material the biomechanical compatibility is closely related to the internal structure and porosity distribution. To describe appropriately the influence of the properties of NiTi on the memory shape, two types of materials provided by different sources has been analyzed. Despite the fact that both materials present different pores size, they exhibit an open and interconnected porosity. Our measurements show that the temperature of the inception of the martensite-austenite phase transition occurs at 60 degrees C, which is by 20 degrees C greater than the body temperature. Moreover, we show that the surface characteristics can be greatly influenced by heat treatment. Furthermore, we observe that the R-phase occurs only for one of the used materials after its heat treatment. The correlation between the composition and the other characteristics measured has been found.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations46
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicShape Memory Alloy TransformationsFrench-language works237,207