Experimental study of the Ca–Mg–Zn system using diffusion couples and key alloys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nine diffusion couples and 32 key samples were prepared to map the phase diagram of the Ca–Mg–Zn system. Phase relations and solubility limits were determined for binary and ternary compounds using scanning electron microscopy, electron probe microanalysis and x-ray diffraction (XRD). The crystal structure of the ternary compounds was studied by XRD and electron backscatter diffraction. Four ternary intermetallic (IM) compounds were identified in this system: Ca3MgxZn15−x (4.6x12 at 335 °C, IM1), Ca14.5Mg15.8Zn69.7 (IM2), Ca2Mg5Zn13 (IM3) and Ca1.5Mg55.3Zn43.2 (IM4). Three binary compounds were found to have extended solid solubility into ternary systems: CaZn11, CaZn13 and Mg2Ca form substitutional solid solutions where Mg substitutes for Zn atoms in the first two compounds, and Zn substitutes for both Ca and Mg atoms in Mg2Ca. The isothermal section of the Ca–Mg–Zn phase diagram at 335 °C was constructed on the basis of the obtained experimental results. The morphologies of the diffusion couples in the Ca–Mg–Zn phase diagram at 335 °C were studied. Depending on the terminal compositions of the diffusion couples, the two-phase regions in the diffusion zone have either a tooth-like morphology or contain a matrix phase with isolated and/or dendritic precipitates.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".