MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Thermal Stability of Nanostructured Electrodeposits

2002· article· en· W2079524120 on OpenAlexaff
G.D. Hibbard, U. Erb, K.T. Aust, Uta Klement, Gianfranco Palumbo

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials science forum · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrodeposition and Electroless Coatings
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceThermal stabilityMetallurgyNanotechnologyComposite materialChemical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a result of their unique, but well-behaved structure-property relationships, porosity free nanostructured electrodeposits in the form of thin and thick coatings, free-standing sheet, foil or wire, and complex shapes, are rapidly finding applications in many different areas. Because of the large driving force for grain growth in these materials, however, their thermal stability may be a critical issue for some applications. This paper reviews previous grain growth studies of \nnanostructured electrodeposits. Thermal stability has been evaluated using several different experimental approaches. Calorimetric studies of nanocrystalline nickel based electrodeposits have shown a general trend of increasing thermal stability by alloying with either P or Fe. There is, however, little agreement between the various studies in terms of suggested growth mechanisms. \nIndeed, because of the large range of annealed structures obtained from different annealing treatments, several distinct growth mechanisms have been suggested. Recent grain growth studies of nanostructured Ni electrodeposits, covering a much broader range of annealing conditions than used before, have shown that the multiple types of previously reported annealed structures are in fact the product of a multi-staged growth process.\n

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 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.573

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations50
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterials science forumSame topicElectrodeposition and Electroless CoatingsFrench-language works237,207