MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019369181 · doi:10.1088/0965-0393/10/2/306

Prediction of temperature distribution in the hot rolling of slabs

2002· article· en· W2019369181 on OpenAlexafffund
S. Serajzadeh, A. Karimi Taheri, F. Mucciardi

Bibliographic record

VenueModelling and Simulation in Materials Science and Engineering · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetallurgy and Material Forming
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsMaterials scienceSlabWork (physics)Finite element methodRolling millDeformation (meteorology)Heat transferMechanicsFlow stressHeat transfer coefficientMetallurgyStress (linguistics)Flow (mathematics)Composite materialStructural engineeringMechanical engineeringStrain rate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the process of continuous hot slab rolling, it is vital to know the temperature distribution within the slab along the length of the rolling mill because temperature is the dominant parameter controlling the kinetics of metallurgical transformations and the flow stress of the rolled metal. In other words, the microstructural changes, the mechanical properties as well as the final dimensions of the product and roll-force depend on the temperature distribution within the metal being rolled. In this paper, a mathematical model based on the finite element method is utilized to predict the temperature distribution and microstructural changes during the continuous hot slab rolling process. The effects of various parameters such as the heat of deformation, the work-roll temperature, the rolling speed, and the heat transfer coefficient between the work-roll and the metal are all taken into account in the analyses. To verify the validity of the model and the generated computer code, a comparison is carried out between the theoretical and plant-recorded results.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations46
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModelling and Simulation in Materials Science and EngineeringSame topicMetallurgy and Material FormingFrench-language works237,207