MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091168085 · doi:10.1002/sia.2531

XPS characterization of the corrosion film formed on the electroless nickel deposit prepared using different stabilizers in NaCl solution

2007· article· en· W2091168085 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Woo‐Jae Cheong, B. Luan, N. S. McIntyre, David W. Shoesmith

Bibliographic record

VenueSurface and Interface Analysis · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCorrosion Behavior and Inhibition
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAtomic Energy of Canada Limited
KeywordsX-ray photoelectron spectroscopyThioureaCorrosionNickelPassivationStabilizer (aeronautics)Inorganic chemistryChemistryMaleic acidSulfurImpurityMaterials scienceNuclear chemistryMetallurgyChemical engineeringLayer (electronics)Organic chemistryPolymer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract X‐ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) was used to examine the corrosion films formed on electroless nickel (EN) deposits prepared in an EN solution containing two different types and concentrations of bath stabilizers in Ar‐purged and oxygenated neutral 5% NaCl solution. Two distinctive corrosion films were observed after long periods of immersion. An enrichment of elemental phosphorus compared to nickel was observed on the surface of the EN deposit produced with no stabilizer and with maleic acid (MA). By comparison, a high degree of surface oxidation was observed on the EN deposit prepared with thiourea. Trace impurities of sulfur in the EN deposit prepared with thiourea appear to result in enhanced corrosion and, in turn, lead to the build‐up of corrosion products on the EN surface. By contrast, a P‐enriched chemical passivation layer was formed on the EN deposits prepared either without any stabilizer or with MA present. Copyright © 2007 Crown in the right of Canada, and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.001
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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.363

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations15
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSurface and Interface AnalysisSame topicCorrosion Behavior and InhibitionFrench-language works237,207