MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Laboratory Evaluation of New Type of Backup Roll for Strip Shape Control

2005· article· en· W2086098101 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueISIJ International · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetallurgy and Material Forming
Canadian institutionsQUAD Engineering (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBackupEngineeringRolling millMechanical engineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this research work, a new back-up roll was developed, which could be used in any type of 4 high mills to reduce the strip shape defects. The developed back-up roll consists of a sleeve, an arbor and a phase angle adjusting system for the arbor. The circumference of arbor was specially machined to adapt the strip width when changing the product and control the shape during rolling. The developed Φ530mm×498mm backup roll was installed in a pilot mill and the rolling test was carried out to prove the effectiveness of the newly developed back-up roll. The rolling tests showed that the new back-up roll has better performance in reducing the shape defects than conventional back-up roll. It was also found that the new back-up roll provided higher shape stability. In addition, the arbor can be manufactured using scrapped conventional backup rolls, and it can be multi-times used because only sleeve surface needs to be reground and changed in most cases.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.498
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.269 · 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