MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Historical Aspects of Thermomechanical Processing for Steels

2007· article· en· W2005307374 on OpenAlexaff
H.J. McQueen

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials science forum · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrostructure and Mechanical Properties of Steels
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceMetallurgyThermomechanical processingForgingAusteniteSubstructureMicrostructureWeldingFerrite (magnet)MartensiteFormabilityToughnessComposite materialStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thermomechanical processing (TMP) involves both thermal and mechanical treatments that define both product shape and microstructure/properties. Since the industrial revolution, machines of augmented power, size and precision have given rise to TMP that challenged explanation of the crystal mechanisms. In wrought iron, lamellar ferrite exhibited high transverse crack resistance due to fine slag stringers that as flux facilitated welding of puddled bars in forging of shafts or rolling of plates for bell-welding into pressure tight pipes; the substructure developed in the iron as working continued below 900°C strengthened it. Patenting of high C steel wire led to an optimum cold-drawn structure for outstanding strength and toughness. Hot forming technology, combined with the refining potential for austenite decomposition gave rise to controlled rolling for enhanced ferrite nucleation, ausforming to refine martensite and intercritical rolling to deform the ferrite or to spheroidize the carbides. Cold rolling and annealing have been scheduled to impart suitable strength, grain size, substructure and texture.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.006

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.231
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations9
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterials science forumSame topicMicrostructure and Mechanical Properties of SteelsFrench-language works237,207