MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020886323 · doi:10.1179/cmq.2009.48.2.133

On the Contact of Liquid Nickel with Tungsten Carbide or Boron Carbide

2009· article· en· W2020886323 on OpenAlexfundno aff
K.A. Sandy, H. Henein, Kevin M. Jaansalu

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Metallurgical Quarterly · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced materials and composites
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSyncrude
KeywordsNickelMaterials scienceBoron carbideEutectic systemCeramicMetallurgyTungsten carbideCarbideTungstenElectron microprobeComposite materialMicrostructure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Metal matrix composites (MMCs), consisting of a ceramic reinforcing phase combined with a tough metal matrix can be applied to steel substrates as wear coatings. The processing behaviour of two nickel matrix MMC's is investigated: Ni-WC and Ni-B4C. Experiments were designed and carried out where WC or B4C was added to molten nickel. The temperature range was from 1773 to 1973 K, with times of contact between ceramic and nickel ranging from less than one minute to over 30 minutes. The nominal addition of WC ranged from a molar ratio (Ni:ceramic) of 4.2 to 167.0 while B4C additions varied from about 1 to 94. The melt was sampled following the addition of the ceramic. Analysis techniques included chemical analysis, optical microscopy, electron microprobe microanalysis and X-ray diffraction. In the Ni-WC system, a portion of WC reacted resulting in tungsten dissolution into the nickel. Reactions in the Ni-B4C system produced nickel borides, principally Ni3B in the form of a eutectic with nickel and primary nickel dendrites. No B4C was detected in any of the samples utilizing the aforementioned test methods.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.422
Threshold uncertainty score0.864

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Metallurgical QuarterlySame topicAdvanced materials and compositesFrench-language works237,207