MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1570365085 · doi:10.2172/770633

A Novel Approach to Materials Development for Advanced Reactor Systems - Quarterly Progress Report: Year 2; Quarter 1

2002· report· en· W1570365085 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gary S. Was, M. Atzmon, L. Wang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNuclear Materials and Properties
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIrradiationMaterials scienceAusteniteMetallurgyMicrostructureAlloyCharacterization (materials science)Quarter (Canadian coin)ProtonDose rateRadiochemistryChemistryNuclear physicsNanotechnologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OAK B188 A Novel Approach to Materials Development for Advanced Reactor Systems - Quarterly Progress Report: Year 2; Quarter 1. There are three major goals for year two of the program. First, to build on the successful initial experiments on proton irradiation of pressure vessel steel to expand the irradiations to study dose rate and temperature effects, radiation effects on commercial alloys and to better characterize the precipitates. Second, we will begin irradiation and characterization of the Zircaloy alloys. Finally, we will continue low temperature irradiations and begin irradiation of chromium pre-enriched samples and cold-worked samples to assess the role of microstructure in IASCC of austenitic stainless steels. In quarter 1 of year 2, the project goal was to complete irradiation of model alloys of RPV steels for a range of doses and an initial sample characterization. We also planned to begin characterization of Zircalloy alloy samples and to make a set of cold-worked samples of 304 SS that would have a fixed hardness following subsequent irradiation to different doses.

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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.008

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.216 · 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
GenreOther

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 topicNuclear Materials and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207