MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976924366 · doi:10.2320/matertrans.m2010063

The Assimilation Mechanism of Mn-Al Compacts in Liquid Mg

2010· article· en· W1976924366 on OpenAlexaff
Zhi Li, Stavros A. Argyropoulos

Bibliographic record

VenueMATERIALS TRANSACTIONS · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetallic Glasses and Amorphous Alloys
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntermetallicExothermic reactionMaterials scienceSwellingPorosityAssimilation (phonology)Homogenization (climate)MetallurgyMass transferChemical engineeringAlloyComposite materialChemistryChromatographyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the assimilation mechanism of Mn-Al compacts in liquid Mg, utilizing procedures that have been employed successfully in studying assimilation mechanisms in other liquid metals. Two critical steps were identified in the assimilation process: (1) melting of some Mn-Al reaction products and (2) mass transfer of phases with the high Mn content from the reaction sites into the Mg bath. The assimilation process was divided into three stages: incubation stage, intermetallic reaction stage, and homogenization stage. Compact swelling was observed during the intermetallic reaction stage. Yet, contrary to the currently-held prevalent view, it was determined that compact swelling was not due primarily to the formation of new intermetallic phases. Rather, swelling is due to the existence of a large amount of porosity initially in the compact which becomes greatly augmented with the large heat released during the Mn-Al exothermic intermetallic reactions.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMATERIALS TRANSACTIONSSame topicMetallic Glasses and Amorphous AlloysFrench-language works237,207