MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

External Reference Samples for Residual Stress Analysis by X-Ray Diffraction

2014· article· en· W2109374838 on OpenAlex
Fabien Lefèbvre, Eric Wasniewski, Manuel François, J. Cacot, P. Le-Bec, E. Baumhauer, Denis Bouscaud, Thierry Bergey, D. Blaize, David Gloaguen, A. Cosson, Sébastien Jégou, Yann Cheynet, S. Leray, M. Meheux, J.C. Monvoisin, Patrick Allain, Juan C. Vidal, Jean‐Michel Sprauel, P. Goudeau, C. Charles, L. Daflon, Claas Fischer, L. Desmas, A. Ouâkka, Marie-José Moya, Y. Bordiec, Hédi Hamdi

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

VenueAdvanced materials research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWelding Techniques and Residual Stresses
Canadian institutionsSafran Electronics (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiffractionResidual stressCalibrationResidualMaterials scienceX-rayX-ray crystallographySample (material)Computer sciencePhysicsMathematicsOpticsStatisticsMetallurgyAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The GFAC (French Association for residual stress analysis) has been working for several years on external reference samples in relation with the EN 15305-2009 standard. The purpose of this campaign is to provide an external reference sample to each laboratory involved in the round-robin to allow a good calibration, a good quality control of their X-ray diffraction system and an easiest way to compare results between laboratories. All the procedures to qualify external reference materials will be described in the paper.

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)0.001
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 score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.550

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.307 · 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