MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Depth dependence and strain rate sensitivity of indentation stress of 6061 aluminium alloy

2012· article· en· W2129237542 on OpenAlex
Meysam Haghshenas, Liang Wang, R.J. Klassen

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

VenueMaterials Science and Technology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetal and Thin Film Mechanics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndentationMaterials scienceStrain rateDislocationComposite materialDeformation (meteorology)AluminiumAlloyDeformation mechanismMetallurgyMicrostructure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Indentation tests were performed on samples of 6061 aluminium alloy in the annealed, T4 and T6 temper conditions. The tests were performed over a range of loading rates to study the effect of indentation strain rate [Formula: see text] on the indentation depth dependence of the average indentation stress σ ind . While [Formula: see text] changes by several orders of magnitude during the constant loading rate nano-/microscale indentation tests, we observed that the strain rate sensitivity of σ ind increases with decreasing indentation depth for all the samples tested. By applying an obstacle limited dislocation glide description of the deformation process, we were able to demonstrate that the apparent activation energy of the obstacles to dislocation glide increases with decreasing indentation depth and is also dependent upon the heat treatment condition of the 6061 test material. This suggests that, based upon the assumption of the operative deformation mechanism chosen, the strength of the dislocation–obstacle interactions that limit the rate of deformation is significantly increased in indentations of depth <∼4 μm.

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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.233

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.214 · 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