MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Constitutive Equations for Mg Alloy Hot Work Modeling

2008· article· en· W2081415496 on OpenAlexaff
H.J. McQueen, Paola Leo, Emanuela Cerri

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials science forum · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMagnesium Alloys: Properties and Applications
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstitutive equationMaterials scienceExtrusionHomogenization (climate)MicrostructureHot workingAlloyFlow stressMetallurgyPlasticityMechanicsComposite materialThermodynamicsFinite element methodPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Constitutive equations for hot working are of great importance in optimizing forming processes to balance reductions in preheating and force, to avoid defects and to improve properties. Flow curve shapes and. constitutive parameters are affected by variations in composition, in homogenization, in grain morphology and significantly in texture. Confidence in published analyses is enhanced by existence of many data for the same or similar alloys. In this paper, constitutive equations have been collected for commercial Mg alloys from torsion, compression and tension tests in the range from 10-3 to 10 s-1 and 180 – 500°C. Some data were determined by the authors’ but more came from published reports; in some cases they have been re-calculated in a common manner. The deformation and restoration mechanisms that control the flow curve shape and the material parameters are summarized. Microstructure investigations of strained samples are illustrated. Applications to extrusion or rolling are discussed; comparisons to Al are made as appropriate.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.006

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations21
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterials science forumSame topicMagnesium Alloys: Properties and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207