MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Study of Recovery and Recrystallisation in a Folded Al Alloy

2013· article· en· W2094594562 on OpenAlexaff
H.S. Ubhi, I. Brough, Kim Larsen

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials science forum · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMicrostructure and mechanical properties
Canadian institutionsOxford Instruments (Canada)
FundersUniversity of Manchester
KeywordsMaterials scienceElectron backscatter diffractionNucleationMicrostructureMetallurgyIn situAlloyRecrystallization (geology)Texture (cosmology)Grain growthIsothermal processCrystallographyComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Changes in the microstructure and crystallographic orientations during in-situ heating of folded Al 0.1%Mg have been followed by SEM and EBSD. The folding process results in both strain and texture gradients across the folded region which in turn can influence the recovery and recrystallisation processes as well as crystallographic texture. This work is an extension of ex-situ heating experiments on folded nickel 200, titanium and ferritic steel [1,2]. The present findings illustrates that during isothermal in-situ heating at 295oC nucleation and growth starts close to the surface where the deformation is highest, new grains form and grow in a region about quarter depth of the sheet thickness. After this grain growth occurs resulting in large grains that meet up at the centre line. These results are consistent with those found in ex-situ heated Ni200 alloy [2], where fine grains were found in the compressed and tensile regions with large grains in the middle of the sheet.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterials science forumSame topicMicrostructure and mechanical propertiesFrench-language works237,207