MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Fabrication and Characterization of ZrB <sub>2</sub> ‐Based Ceramic Using Synthesized ZrB <sub>2</sub> –LaB <sub>6</sub> Powder

2008· article· en· W2124451037 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

VenueJournal of the American Ceramic Society · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicAdvanced ceramic materials synthesis
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceCeramicFracture toughnessComposite materialMicrostructureHot pressingFabricationZirconium diborideFlexural strengthCeramic matrix composite

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ZrB 2 –LaB 6 powder was obtained by reactive synthesis using ZrO 2 , La 2 O 3 , B 4 C, and carbon powders. Then ZrB 2 –20 vol% SiC–10 vol% LaB 6 (ZSL) ceramics were prepared from commercially available SiC and the synthesized ZrB 2 –LaB 6 powder via hot pressing at 2000°C. The phase composition, microstructure, and mechanical properties were characterized. Results showed that both LaB 6 and SiC were uniformly distributed in the ZrB 2 matrix. The hardness and bending strength of ZSL were 17.06±0.52 GPa and 505.8±17.9 MPa, respectively. Fracture toughness was 5.7±0.39 MPa·m 1/2 , which is significantly higher than that reported for ZrB 2 –20 vol% SiC ceramics, due to enhanced crack deflection and crack bridging near SiC particles.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.220 · 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