MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Chemically Bonded Composite Sol–Gel Alumina Coatings

2005· article· en· W2152525744 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

VenueJournal of the American Ceramic Society · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicAdvanced ceramic materials synthesis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComposite numberSinteringMaterials sciencePhosphoric acidCeramicComposite materialSol-gelChemical bondEpoxyFiller (materials)MetallurgyChemistryNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This communication introduces chemically bonded (CB) composite sol–gel (SG) technology. The composite includes majority (>80 vol%) particulate filler, the balance being SG‐derived bonding phase. Ceramic bond formation in such a composite is induced through chemical reaction rather than through sintering. In the particular variant of the process presented here, the reactivity of the SG‐derived alumina ceramics toward phosphates, such as aluminum phosphate or phosphoric acid, is explored to produce a ceramic (reaction) bond in the system without sintering. This allows attaining structural integrity of the composite at relatively low temperatures of 300°C. Several examples of 40–200 μm thick films of CB alumina on stainless steel, Mg and Al, Ni, and on carbon fiber‐reinforced epoxy are discussed.

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 score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.715

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.248
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