MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Novel Fabrication Method for Nitinol Shape Memory Alloys

2010· article· en· W2005607628 on OpenAlexaff
Syed Asghar Husain Rizvi, Tahir I. Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueKey engineering materials · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicShape Memory Alloy Transformations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceNickel titaniumShape-memory alloyScanning electron microscopePolishingDiffusion bondingComposite materialDifferential scanning calorimetryFabricationOptical microscopeTitaniumFOIL methodDiffusion weldingMetallurgyWelding

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nitinol (NiTi) shape memory alloys are widely used in a variety of biomedical applications, such as dental implants, cervical and lumbar vertebral replacements, joint replacements and stents. In this study, commercially pure Ti and Ni foils ~100 um thick were diffusion bonded in vacuum. The experimental conditions were optimized to achieve a near equiatomic composition to produce NiTi SMA thin foil of approx. 5-8 micron thick. The cross-sectional surfaces of joint were subjected to metallographic investigation using optical microscope after grinding, polishing and etching. Scanning electron microscope equipped with EDX system was utilized to characterize the bonded layer and compositional analysis. Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) technique was employed to determine the shape memory effect. The samples were subjected to X-ray diffraction analysis in order to establish phase structures formed during the diffusion bonding stage. An ultra fast femto-second laser facility was utilized to ensure the production of complex shapes or patterns within micron scale.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKey engineering materialsSame topicShape Memory Alloy TransformationsFrench-language works237,207