Classification of Textures and Microstructure Stability in Rolled F.C.C. Metals with Grain Interactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A novel experimental investigation of both high and medium stacking fault energy bi-crystals of aluminum and copper, respectively, show that orientation, grain interaction and material are all key factors in the stability of some ideal rolling texture components. Ideal {110} or {112} orientations obtained from high purity aluminum or copper single crystals were embedded within a {110} crystal orientation of the same material and reduced 60 percent by channel die compression at room temperature. Spatial misorientations developed inside the deformation bands were analyzed using SEM-based EBSD. The presence of long-range orientation gradients in some of the crystals revealed the interacting nature of polycrystalline deformation. From the results it is proposed that f.c.c. polycrystalline grains can be classified according to their stability and susceptibility to deformation: (i) stable and interacting; (ii) unstable and interacting; (iii) stable and non-interacting; (iv) unstable and non-interacting.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".