MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047812250 · doi:10.1080/10238160701373974

Comparison between single peak and Rietveld analysis of a zircaloy-4 weldment

2007· article· en· W2047812250 on OpenAlexaff
T. M. Holden, B. Clausen, David G. Carr

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neutron Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFatigue and fracture mechanics
Canadian institutionsDeep River Science Academy
FundersLos Alamos National Laboratory
KeywordsZirconium alloyMaterials scienceRietveld refinementCrystallographyMetallurgyZirconiumCrystal structureChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A comparison has been made between weld stresses in a Zircaloy-4 weld obtained by fitting individual peaks of the diffraction spectrum and by fitting the complete pattern by the Rietveld method. For the as-welded case there was satisfactory agreement between the two approaches. For the as-annealed case the agreement is less satisfactory possibly because of systematic errors in the “stress-free references”. It is suggested that the reference samples should have been cut from an annealed companion weld rather than by annealing the reference samples originally cut from the as-welded sample.

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)0.002
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 score0.619
Threshold uncertainty score0.275

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neutron ResearchSame topicFatigue and fracture mechanicsFrench-language works237,207