MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143790036 · doi:10.5006/1.3280899

A Review of Corrosion of Titanium Grade 7 and Other Titanium Alloys in Nuclear Waste Repository Environments

2005· review· en· W2143790036 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

VenueCORROSION · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNuclear Materials and Properties
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersLawrence Livermore National LaboratoryU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsTitaniumCorrosionMetallurgyMaterials scienceRadioactive wasteTitanium alloyWaste managementEngineeringAlloy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Titanium alloy degradation modes are reviewed in relation to their performance in repository environments. General corrosion, localized corrosion, stress corrosion cracking, hydrogen-induced cracking, microbiologically influenced corrosion, and radiation-assisted corrosion of Ti alloys are considered. With respect to the Ti Grade 7 drip shields selected for emplacement in the repository at Yucca Mountain, general corrosion, hydrogen-induced cracking, and radiation-assisted corrosion either do not initiate or propagate sufficiently fast over a 10,000-year time frame in likely repository environments to cause penetration of the drip shield. Stress corrosion cracking (in the absence of disruptive events) is of no consequence to barrier performance; and localized corrosion and microbiologically influenced corrosion are not expected to occur. To facilitate the discussion, Ti Grades 2, 5, 7, 9, 11, 12, 16, 17, 18, and 24 are included in this review.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.860
Threshold uncertainty score0.960

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.240 · 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