Predicting Crack Instability Behaviour of Burst Tests from Small Specimens for Irradiated Zr-2.5Nb Pressure Tubes
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A scaling approach, based on the deformation J-integral at maximum load obtained from small specimens, is proposed for predicting the crack instability behaviour of burst tests on irradiated Zr-2.5Nb pressure tubes. An assessment of this approach is carried out by comparison with other toughness criteria such as the modified J-integral and the plastic work dissipation rate approach. The largest discrepancy between the different parameters occurs for materials of intermediate toughness which exhibit the most stable crack growth and tunnelling up to maximum load. A study of one material of intermediate toughness suggests crack-front tunnelling has a significant influence on the results obtained from the 17-mm-wide specimens. It is shown that for a tube of intermediate toughness the different approaches can significantly underpredict the extent of stable crack growth before instability in a burst test even after correcting for tunnelling. The usefulness of a scaling approach in reducing the discrepancy between the small- and large-scale specimen results for this material is demonstrated.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it