MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154564025 · doi:10.4271/2008-01-1156

Development of an Improved Cosmetic Corrosion Test for Finished Aluminum Autobody Panels

2008· article· en· W2154564025 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

VenueSAE International Journal of Materials and Manufacturing · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
Canadian institutionsChrysler (Canada)Western UniversityNovelis (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorrosionAluminiumMaterials scienceForensic engineeringMetallurgyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="htmlview paragraph">A task group within the SAE Automotive Corrosion and Protection (ACAP) Committee continues to pursue the goal of establishing a standard test method for in-laboratory cosmetic corrosion evaluations of finished aluminum auto body panels. The program is a cooperative effort with OEM, supplier, and consultant participation and is supported in part by USAMP (AMD 309) and the U.S. Department of Energy. Numerous laboratory corrosion test environments have been used to evaluate the performance of painted aluminum closure panels, but correlations between laboratory test results and in-service performance have not been established. The primary objective of this project is to identify an accelerated laboratory test method that correlates with in-service performance. In this paper the type, extent, and chemical nature of cosmetic corrosion observed in the on-vehicle exposures are compared with those from some of the commonly used laboratory tests</div>

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)0.000
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.360

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.225 · 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