MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W150456572 · doi:10.5006/c2002-02547

Corrosion Performance of Grain Boundary Engineered Alloy 22 for Application in Nuclear Waste Storage Containers

2002· article· en· W150456572 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Lin, Gianfranco Palumbo, D. Limoges, Daekee Lee, Mhairi Mackenzie

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAluminum Alloy Microstructure Properties
Canadian institutionsRedlen Technologies (Canada)Integran (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorrosionMaterials scienceRadioactive wasteGrain boundaryMetallurgyAlloySpent nuclear fuelWaste managementMicrostructureEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract As a result of its excellent corrosion resistance, Alloy 22 (UNS N06022), has been selected a candidate material for the construction of high level nuclear waste storage containers. However, its intergranular corrosion resistance is known to be affected by simulated long term aging at elevated temperatures, and may also be compromised by container closure weld operations. Advances in understanding structure-property relationships for grain boundaries in polycrystalline materials have led to the development of cost-effective thermomechanical processes for the control of grain boundary structures in numerous conventional polycrystalline materials. These processing methods (GBE) have been previously shown to yield significant improvements in resistance to sensitization, intergranular corrosion and stress corrosion cracking. In this study, the applicability of GBE processing to Alloy 22 canister materials will be presented and discussed. The relative intergranular corrosion susceptibility of GBE- processed and conventional wrought Alloy 22 will be presented under conditions of simulated long term aging (i.e. 649°C upto 1000 hours) and closure weld operations.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.168 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAluminum Alloy Microstructure PropertiesFrench-language works237,207