MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

High Strain Rate Behaviour of Aluminium Alloy Sheet

2006· article· en· W2026457069 on OpenAlex
Michael J. Worswick, R. Smerd, C. P. Salisbury, S. Winkler, David J. Lloyd

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials science forum · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicHigh-Velocity Impact and Material Behavior
Canadian institutionsNovelis (Canada)University of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceStrain rateSplit-Hopkinson pressure barAluminiumElongationUltimate tensile strengthStrain (injury)AlloyMetallurgySlow strain rate testingComposite materialTensile testingBar (unit)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents results from quasi-static and high rate tensile testing of three aluminum sheet alloys, AA5754, AA5182 and AA6111, all of which are candidates for replacing mild steel in automotive bodies. Tests were performed at quasi-static rates using an Instron apparatus and at strain rates of 600 to 1500 s-1 using a tensile split Hopkinson bar. Additionally, an in-depth investigation was performed to determine the levels of damage within the materials and its sensitivity to strain rate. The constitutive response of all of the aluminum alloys tested showed only mild strain rate sensitivity. Dramatic increases in the elongation to failure were observed with increases in strain rate as well as greater reduction in area. Additionally, the level of damage was seen to increase with strain rate.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.248 · 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