MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124578255 · doi:10.1139/p10-082

A Canadian perspective on engineering strain measurements by neutron diffractionSpecial issue on Neutron Scattering in Canada.

2010· article· en· W2124578255 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
T. M. Holden

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicX-ray Diffraction in Crystallography
Canadian institutionsDeep River Science Academy
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsNeutronNeutron scatteringElasticity (physics)PlasticityLattice (music)Stress–strain curveStatistical physicsCondensed matter physicsMechanicsNuclear physicsClassical mechanicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The origins of the method, which relies on the high penetration of thermal neutrons through most industrial materials, in the late 1970s and 1980s and its development up to the present time are described. The basic steps from the measurement of lattice spacing to the calculation of stress are outlined. The length scales on which strains and stresses are manifest have a bearing on the interpretation of strain in terms of stress. A number of examples of macroscopic strain or stress fields are described where these scale considerations, as well as gradients of solute concentration that affect the interpretation of strain, matter. The strains on the length scale of the grains provide useful information about the elasticity and plasticity of materials, particularly in materials of lower symmetry than cubic. Finally, a number of future directions are suggested, which are enabled by the new intense neutron sources and improved equipment built in the last few years.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.445

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0050.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.003

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.211 · 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
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicX-ray Diffraction in CrystallographyFrench-language works237,207