MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1534625089 · doi:10.3390/ma8085138

A Unified Model for the Prediction of Yield Strength in Particulate-Reinforced Metal Matrix Nanocomposites

2015· article· en· W1534625089 on OpenAlexafffund
F. A. Mirza, D.L. Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAluminum Alloys Composites Properties
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMaterials scienceNanocompositeYield (engineering)Composite materialStiffnessPorosityStrengthening mechanisms of materialsMatrix (chemical analysis)Powder metallurgyGrain sizeCastingMetallurgyMicrostructure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lightweighting in the transportation industry is today recognized as one of the most important strategies to improve fuel efficiency and reduce anthropogenic climate-changing, environment-damaging, and human death-causing emissions. However, the structural applications of lightweight alloys are often limited by some inherent deficiencies such as low stiffness, high wear rate and inferior strength. These properties could be effectively enhanced by the addition of stronger and stiffer reinforcements, especially nano-sized particles, into metal matrix to form composites. In most cases three common strengthening mechanisms (load-bearing effect, mismatch of coefficients of thermal expansion, and Orowan strengthening) have been considered to predict the yield strength of metal matrix nanocomposites (MMNCs). This study was aimed at developing a unified model by taking into account the matrix grain size and porosity (which is unavoidable in the materials processing such as casting and powder metallurgy) in the prediction of the yield strength of MMNCs. The Zener pinning effect of grain boundaries by the nano-sized particles has also been integrated. The model was validated using the experimental data of magnesium- and titanium-based nanocomposites containing different types of nano-sized particles (namely, Al₂O₃, Y₂O₃, and carbon nanotubes). The predicted results were observed to be in good agreement with the experimental data reported in the literature.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations118
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterialsSame topicAluminum Alloys Composites PropertiesFrench-language works237,207