MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Atomistic investigation on the structure–property relationship during thermal spray nanoparticle impact

2014· article· en· W2056569716 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Saurav Goel, Nadimul Haque Faisal, Vilma Ratia, Anupam Agrawal, Alexander Stukowski

Bibliographic record

VenueComputational Materials Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Heat Transfer
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersScience and Technology Facilities CouncilQueen's UniversityRoyal Society of EdinburghRoyal Society
KeywordsFlatteningMaterials scienceSubstrate (aquarium)Aspect ratio (aeronautics)CopperReynolds numberParticle (ecology)Kinetic energyNanoparticleThermalParticle sizeComposite materialThermodynamicsNanotechnologyChemical engineeringMetallurgyTurbulenceClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During thermal spraying, hot particles impact on a colder substrate. This interaction of crystalline copper nanoparticles and copper substrate is modeled, using MD simulation. The quantitative results of the impacts at different velocities and temperatures are evaluated using a newly defined flattening aspect ratio. This ratio between the maximum diameter after the impact and the height of the splat increases with increasing Reynolds numbers until a critical value is reached. At higher Reynolds numbers the flattening aspect ratio decreases again, as the kinetic energy of the particle leads to increasing substrate temperature and, therefore, decreases the substrate resistance. Thus, the particle penetrates into the substrate and deforms less.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations38
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputational Materials ScienceSame topicFluid Dynamics and Heat TransferFrench-language works237,207