MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effect of Process Variables on Microstructural Features during Solidification of AM60B Magnesium Alloy

2012· article· en· W1988413565 on OpenAlexafffund
Indranil Basu, J.T. Wood, J.P. Weiler

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials science forum · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAluminum Alloy Microstructure Properties
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaShandong Academy of Sciences
KeywordsMaterials scienceMicrostructureDendrite (mathematics)PorosityMoldMetallurgyMagnesium alloyGrain sizeCastingTemperature gradientAlloyDirectional solidificationComposite materialPhase (matter)Geometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, commercial AM60B magnesium alloy was studied under different solidification conditions to understand the influence of cooling rate, thermal gradient, growth velocity, Niyama criterion, solidification time and mold dimensions on microstructural features such as secondary and tertiary dendrite arm spacing, grain size, porosity, pore shape and size, local morphological and phase variations. Porosity, grain size and dendrite arm spacing were measured as functions of the process variables. It was realized that the process of mold filling and solidification are simultaneous in nature and they significantly affect the microstructure development trends and its dependency on the process parameters. A significant effect, of the above mentioned, was found on the obtained porosity values and their variation along the casting. The results clearly indicate that rate of filling, nature of flow of liquid and shape of the mold greatly affect the solidification process and thereby the microstructure.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.608

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterials science forumSame topicAluminum Alloy Microstructure PropertiesFrench-language works237,207