MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1810935698 · doi:10.5539/mas.v9n6p296

The Influence of Electron Beam Oscillation on the Crystallization and Structure of Dissimilar Steel-Bronze Welds

2015· article· en· W1810935698 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tatiana V. Olshanskaya, G. L. Permyakov, Vladimir Belenkiy, Д. Н. Трушников

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWelding Techniques and Residual Stresses
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceOscillation (cell signaling)WeldingBronzeBeam (structure)Electron beam weldingSolidityMetallurgyWeld poolCathode rayComposite materialGas tungsten arc weldingElectronOpticsArc weldingChemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper contains the findings of the metallographic study of dissimilar metal welds (steel 12Х21Н5Т and bronze BrХ-06) made by electron-beam welding (EBW) with beam modulation (transversal and X-shaped oscillation with triple beam splitting). The research shows that beam oscillation causes the metals to stir in the weld pool. As a result, welds have a very heterogeneous structure by width. X-shaped oscillation causes more intensive stirring than transversal oscillation. This leads to more homogenous stirring of crystallizing phases in the centre of the weld. The heterogeneous structure caused by beam oscillation gives the weld a very heterogeneous solidity both by width and depth. Triple beam splitting heated from bronze promotes the homogenous weld structure which is a fine-dispersed mechanical mixture of two systems: a eutectic based on copper and a mixture of solid solutions based on [alpha]-Fe and [gamma]-Fe. Such a structure makes the weld equalizes the solidity of the weld both by width and depth.

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicWelding Techniques and Residual StressesFrench-language works237,207