Synthesizing Nanostructured Ni<sub>75</sub>Mg<sub>16.66</sub>Y<sub>8.34</sub>(at%) Powder by Solid State Reaction and Mechanical Milling
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, nanostructured Ni75Mg16.66Y8.34 (at%) catalyst powder was prepared using two methods. In method one, the pure elemental powders were subjected to high energy ball milling for 5 to 25 h with a ball to powder weight ratio of 20. In method two, the pure elemental powders were pressed, heat treated at 800°C for 8 h (solid state reaction); then, they were ball milled for 2, 7.5 and 10 h, similarly to the first method. Finally, morphology, phases, particle size, crystallite size, and lattice strain values of the prepared powder alloys were determined by X-ray diffraction (XRD) and scanning electron microscope (SEM) methods. The XRD patterns showed that the Mg2Ni9Y ternary intermetallic phase was not formed in the sample prepared by method one; however, that was formed in the samples prepared by the second method. The required milling time for preparing the samples with the same powder specifications by method two was about 50% less than the time required by method one. It was found that the Ni75Mg16.66Y8.34 (at%) powder with smaller particle size, smaller crystallite size, and higher lattice strain values could be prepared by combining solid state reaction and mechanical milling processes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it