MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Representation of Misorientations in Rodrigues-Frank Space: Application to the Bain, Kurdjumov-Sachs, Nishiyama-Wassermann, Pitsch and Greninger-Troiano Orientation Relationships

2005· article· en· W1998383000 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials science forum · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicX-ray Diffraction in Crystallography
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMisorientationSpace (punctuation)Orientation (vector space)Transformation (genetics)Rotation (mathematics)Representation (politics)CrystallographyPure mathematicsMaterials scienceGeometryMathematicsComputer scienceBiologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Orientation relationships between individual crystals can be readily represented in Rodrigues-Frank space because of the one-to-one correspondence between each misorientation and a vector in the fundamental zone of this space. This is done by integrating the rotation angle and axis into a three-component vector. In this study, the three classical orientation relationships describing the γ-to-α transformation, namely the Bain, Kurdjumov-Sachs and Nishiyama- Wassermann, are represented in Rodrigues-Frank space. Also considered are the somewhat less common Pitsch and Greninger-Troiano relationships. The misorientations between these types of transformation variants are displayed in R-F space based on alternative reference systems to highlight the differences. Examples of the various crystallographic relationships between fcc and bcc crystals during the γ-to-α transformation are given to demonstrate the advantages of the use of this space.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.303
Threshold uncertainty score0.737

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.270 · 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