Alternative Acceptance Criteria for Flaws in Ferritic Steel Components Operating in the Upper Shelf Temperature Range
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The flaw evaluation rules for ferritic vessels in IWB-3610, IWB-3620 and Appendix A of ASME Section XI are based on linear elastic fracture mechanics techniques and were developed primarily for the irradiated reactor pressure vessel beltline region and other low temperature carbon and low-alloy steel applications in which the material exhibits limited or no ductility prior to failure. There are situations in which ferritic steel components operate in the upper shelf temperature range and therefore exhibit significant ductility and increased flaw tolerance. Application of linear elastic fracture mechanics techniques to these cases can be very conservative. In order to address flaw evaluation of ferritic materials exhibiting upper shelf toughness and high ductility, the proposed Code Case N-749 of ASME Section XI was developed and is currently under committee review. This proposed Code Case provides alternate acceptance criteria for situations in which the component is operating in the upper shelf temperature range and therefore has adequate ductility to allow the use of elastic-plastic fracture mechanics techniques.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it