MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070649927 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.63.214105

Structure and energetics of long-period tilt grain boundaries using an effective Hamiltonian

2001· article· en· W2070649927 on OpenAlexaff
D. N. Pawaskar, Ronald E. Miller, Rob Phillips

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. B, Condensed matter · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMicrostructure and mechanical properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsHamiltonian (control theory)MetastabilityGrain boundaryStatistical physicsMonte Carlo methodPhysicsEnergeticsHybrid Monte CarloMaterials scienceThermodynamicsMarkov chain Monte CarloQuantum mechanicsMathematicsMicrostructureMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have investigated the atomic structures of 44 〈110〉 symmetric tilt grain boundaries (GB's) with atomistic simulations using an embedded-atom method (EAM) potential for aluminum. The focus has been on examining the efficacy of the structural unit model in the context of very long period boundaries. Our studies, which have been carried out using two EAM potentials, of both the equilibrium and metastable structures of a number of boundaries, reveal that geometric arguments inherent in the structural unit model must be supplemented by energetic considerations. An effective Hamiltonian is introduced to this end which computes the energy of a string of structural units using two-body potentials between individual units. The potentials are calculated via a least-squares fit to the results of full atomistic represented by the effective Hamiltonian. Results based on as few as 16 inputs are very encouraging and clearly demonstrate the effectiveness of this method. This scheme lends itself to a straightforward extension to GB structure calculations at finite temperatures using Monte Carlo techniques.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.279 · 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.

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

Citations10
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. B, Condensed matterSame topicMicrostructure and mechanical propertiesFrench-language works237,207