MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063350767 · doi:10.1520/jte100980

Improvements in the Mercury Displacement Method for Measuring Diffusible Hydrogen Contents in Steels

2009· article· en· W2063350767 on OpenAlexaff
Thushanthi D. A. A. Senadheera, William J. Shaw

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Testing and Evaluation · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetal and Thin Film Mechanics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMercury (programming language)HydrogenMetallurgyMaterials scienceDisplacement (psychology)Forensic engineeringComposite materialChemistryEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The mercury displacement method, also known as the eudiometer method, is one of the most widely used, reliable, and low cost techniques of determining hydrogen quantities in steels. This is one of the few direct and simple techniques for measuring diffusible (mobile) hydrogen quantities. It was originally developed for measuring hydrogen pickup in steels as a result of the welding process, ANSI/AWS A 4.3 standard. However, it is often applied in a more general sense to the measurement of mobile hydrogen in steels as picked up from a wide variety of sources. The main limitation in using this technique is one of safety concerns in handling mercury and controlling the mercury fumes that are given off. This paper describes and suggests a number of modifications and improvements that have been developed from experience over the past couple of years. The modifications increase the accuracy and significantly enhanced the level of safety. The system can be run at moderately high temperatures up to 180°C with minimal mercury vapor loss.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.222 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Testing and EvaluationSame topicMetal and Thin Film MechanicsFrench-language works237,207