MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121694336 · doi:10.1179/026708300101508199

Flow curves up to peak strength of hot deformed D2 and W1 tool steels

2000· article· en· W2121694336 on OpenAlexaff
Clément Imbert, H.J. McQueen

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials Science and Technology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetallurgy and Material Forming
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceMetallurgyDynamic strain agingStrain rateCarbideCarbon steelAlloyFlow stressDuctility (Earth science)Torsion (gastropod)Work hardeningStrain hardening exponentAlloy steelActivation energyComposite materialMicrostructureCreepCorrosion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A high carbon, high chromium cold work die steel (D2) and a water hardenable carbon tool steel (W1) were hot deformed in torsion between 900 and 1150°C for the alloy steel and 900 and 1200°C for the carbon steel, at strain rates from 0·1 to 4 s -1 . The slope of the stress–strain curves, which represents strain hardening, decreased linearly then changed gradually to a slower linear decline before decreasing quickly to zero at the peak stress. On further strain, stress decreased to a steady state regime, indicative of dynamic recrystallisation. Kocks–Mecking analysis provided an activation enthalpy with an average comparable to the activation energy derived from a sinh modified Arrhenius analysis of peak stress. The alloy carbides of the D2 steel have the effect of raising its strength to over twice that of the carbon steel, accelerating the onset of dynamic recrystallisation but drastically lowering its ductility.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations21
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterials Science and TechnologySame topicMetallurgy and Material FormingFrench-language works237,207