MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Grain structure development and eutectic solidification of discontinuous magnesium borate whisker reinforced AA2024 matrix composite

2013· article· en· W2029660324 on OpenAlexaff
Z J Wang, X Z Zhang, Xueyuan Nie, Henry Hu

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Metallurgical Quarterly · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAluminum Alloys Composites Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWhiskerEutectic systemWhiskersComposite numberMaterials scienceMetallurgyDifferential scanning calorimetryScanning electron microscopeNucleationMineralogyComposite materialAlloyPhysicsChemistryThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the present research, the solidification behaviour of MBO whisker reinforced 2024 aluminium alloy matrix composite (MBO/AA2024) was studied by employing computer based thermal analysis, scanning electron microscopy and differential scanning calorimetry. The results show that the addition of MBO whiskers refines the grain structure in the matrix of the MBO/AA2024 composite. The nucleation of primary α-Al phase took place away from the whisker surfaces and started within the interstice of whiskers. The whiskers had almost no significant influence on the refinement of the eutectic phases.Dans cette recherche, on a étudié le comportement de solidification du composite (MBO/AA2024) à matrice d’alliage d’aluminium 2024 renforcée par des barbes de MBO, au moyen de l’analyse thermique automatisée, de la microscopie électronique à balayage et de l’analyse calorimétrique à compensation de puissance. Les résultats montrent que l’addition de barbes de MBO affine la structure de grain dans la matrice du composite MBO/AA2024. La nucléation de la phase primaire α-A1 prenait place à l’écart des surfaces de la barbe et commençait à l’intérieur de l’interstice des barbes. Les barbes n’avaient presque pas d’influence sur l’affinement des phases de l’eutectique.

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 score0.794
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.174
Teacher spread0.169 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Metallurgical QuarterlySame topicAluminum Alloys Composites PropertiesFrench-language works237,207