MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Tool design and stir zone grain size in AZ31 friction stir spot welds

2009· article· en· W1986800832 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueScience and Technology of Welding & Joining · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Welding Techniques Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMaterials scienceFriction stir processingSpot weldingGrain sizeMetallurgyFriction stir weldingMicrostructureComposite materialWelding

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The influence of tool design and tool rotational speed variations on the torque, energy output, stir zone temperature and average grain size in the stir zones of AZ31 friction stir spot welds was investigated. The average stir zone grain size decreased by ∼1 μm in AZ31 friction stir spot welds made using a three-flat/threaded tool design and tool rotational speeds of 2250 and 3000 rev min −1 . However, there was no statistically significant influence of tool design on the average grain sizes in friction stir spot welds made using tool rotational speeds of 1500 and 1000 rev min −1 . There was no evidence of grain growth in the stir zones of AZ31 friction stir spot welds. Similar torque, calculated energy output and stir zone temperature values were found in AZ31 friction stir spot welds made using threaded and three-flat threaded tool designs and tool rotational speeds from 1000 to 3000 rev min −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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.326
Threshold uncertainty score0.508

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.239
Teacher spread0.230 · 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