MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Metallurgical analysis of magnetic pulse welds of AZ31 magnesium alloy

2011· article· en· W2145498379 on OpenAlexafffund
Alexander Berlin, TC Nguyen, Michael J. Worswick, Y. Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueScience and Technology of Welding & Joining · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMagnesium Alloys: Properties and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMaterials scienceWeldingMagnesium alloyComposite materialTransmission electron microscopyMetallurgyDeformation (meteorology)Fracture (geology)AlloyHeat-affected zone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Magnesium AZ31 sheets have been lap welded with magnetic pulse welding using H shaped symmetric coils connected to a Pulsar MPW-25 capacitor bank. The joints displayed an increasing trend in strength with discharge energy. The weld morphology consisted of twin bond zones separated by an unbonded centre zone. Metallographic examination of the unbonded centre zone revealed anisotropic deformation and a lack cleaning from the interface. This zone forms as a result of normal impact in the initial stage of collision. Transmission electron microscopy of the bond zone revealed a continuous interface having an 8–25 μm thick interlayer with dislocation cell structure and distinct boundaries with adjacent material. The interlayer may have formed in a semisolid state at elevated temperature. The interlayer corresponds to a ductile fracture surface and is responsible for the joint's high strength. Nanoscale grains were found beside the interlayer as well as larger, highly elongated grains.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.238
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

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

Citations27
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScience and Technology of Welding & JoiningSame topicMagnesium Alloys: Properties and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207