MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988513474 · doi:10.1080/10238160701374154

Measuring the influence of magnesium on the elastic anisotropy of aluminum using in situ neutron diffraction

2007· article· en· W1988513474 on OpenAlexaff
Hadas Ritz, Paul R. Dawson, R. B. Rogge

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neutron Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetal and Thin Film Mechanics
Canadian institutionsAtomic Energy (Canada)Canadian Nuclear Laboratories
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeutron diffractionMaterials scienceIn situAnisotropyAluminiumMagnesiumDiffractionCrystallographyMetallurgyPhysicsChemistryOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Comparison of lattice strains in crystals of various orientations is a primary method of validating polycrystal plasticity simulations. These strains can be measured using in situ neutron diffraction experiments while the corresponding information can be extracted from the simulation results. If the single crystal elastic moduli—particularly the anisotropy of the moduli with respect to lattice direction—are not accurately known, simulations cannot provide a favorable comparison to experiments. Previous work simulating deformation of an aluminum alloy with significant magnesium content (AA-5182) revealed that consistency with the experiments required a higher degree of anisotropy in the elastic moduli in the finite element simulations than that typically reported for pure aluminum. We undertook the current research to determine if the magnesium content causes that larger single crystal elastic anisotropy. Using in situ loading, we measured lattice strains and determined diffraction moduli of materials covering a range of magnesium content. The results show measurable influence of composition on elastic anisotropy.

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)0.004
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 score0.341
Threshold uncertainty score0.459

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.236 · 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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neutron ResearchSame topicMetal and Thin Film MechanicsFrench-language works237,207