MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1526427300

1 Dynamic Impact Behavior of 6061-T6 and 5083-H131 Aluminum alloys

2016· article· en· W1526427300 on OpenAlexfundno aff
A.G. Odeshi, M.N. Bassim, M. Bolduc

Bibliographic record

VenueGruppo Italiano Frattura Digital Repository (Gruppo Italiano Frattura) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicHigh-Velocity Impact and Material Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAdiabatic shear bandMaterials scienceAlloyAluminiumShear (geology)Charpy impact testSofteningSplit-Hopkinson pressure barMetallurgyComposite materialStrain rateMicrostructure
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The results of a comparative study on microstructural evolution and damage in 6061-T6 and 5083-H131 aluminum alloys tested at high strain rates are discussed. Cylindrical samples of these alloys were tested in compression using instrumented direct impact Hopkinson Bar. Retention of heat and intense thermal softening along narrow bands during impact resulted in inhomogeneous deformation caused by shear strain localization along these bands. Deformed bands consisting of highly distorted and elongated grains were observed in the Aluminum 5083-H131 alloy after high velocity impact. On the other hand, adiabatic shear bands that look similar to the white etching bands commonly found in hardened steels were observed in the Aluminum 6061-T6 alloy. Whereas grain coarsening occurred inside the adiabatic shear bands in the Aluminum 5083-H131 alloy, the adiabatic shear bands in Aluminum 6061-T6 alloy were observed to contain much finer grains than the bulk material. 1.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.245 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGruppo Italiano Frattura Digital Repository (Gruppo Italiano Frattura)Same topicHigh-Velocity Impact and Material BehaviorFrench-language works237,207