MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058642496 · doi:10.1080/00986440590473272

Surface Dissolution and the Development of Scallops

2004· article· en· W2058642496 on OpenAlexaff
Benoit Villien, Ying Zheng, D. H. Lister

Bibliographic record

VenueChemical Engineering Communications · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCorrosion Behavior and Inhibition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDissolutionScallopFlow (mathematics)Volumetric flow rateCarbon steelCorrosionCarbon fibersWater flowMaterials scienceChemical engineeringEnvironmental scienceMetallurgyComposite materialSoil scienceMechanicsEcologyBiologyEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Flow-assisted corrosion (FAC) is a significant problem with carbon steel components exposed to rapidly moving water or water/steam mixtures. Such components often develop distinctive patterns of surface damage called scalloping, so to gain further insight into FAC it is of interest to understand the formation and significance of scallops. Experiments were carried out on the dissolution of pipes made of plaster of Paris (CaSO4.½H2O) to study the evolution of scalloping patterns as well as to explore the link between scalloping and hydrodynamics and scalloping and dissolution rate. The conductivity and pH of water flowing through the test sections were recorded and posttest examination was carried out. Scallops were observed along the plaster surface at the end of the tests. Their characteristics are strongly related to the flow rate; scallop size decreases with increasing flow rate whereas surface density of scallops increases with increasing flow rate. Imperfections such as voids on embedded particles seem necessary for scallops to develop at all.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 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

Citations22
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemical Engineering CommunicationsSame topicCorrosion Behavior and InhibitionFrench-language works237,207