Effect of layered microstructure and its evolution on superplastic behaviour of AA 8090 Al–Li alloy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Superplastic forming grade sheets of AA 8090 Al–Li alloy were observed to contain layers of different microstructure and microtexture across the thickness cross-section. Superplastic behaviour and its relationship to the concurrent microstructural and microtextural evolution of this sheet were studied at 803 K by tensile testing of specimens taken from the full thickness and the near surface and midthickness layers. Initially, the surface layers contained nearly equiaxed and relatively coarse grains with a strong S {123}〈634〉 type texture, whereas the midthickness section had elongated fine grains and a dominant Bs {011}〈211〉 texture. The stress–strain rate (σ–ε) curves exhibited minimum flow stress for the full thickness material. Varying levels of grain growth and texture weakening occurred in the above two layers, the extent of which depended on whether the layers were in separated form or as coexistents in the full thickness material. The maximum values of strain rate sensitivity index for the full thickness, surface, and centre materials were 0.82, 0.64, and 0.56, respectively. The corresponding ductility values were 475, 420, and 286% at ε=1×10-3 s-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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".