MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158499891 · doi:10.4271/2012-01-0955

Sensitivity/Uncertainty Analysis of Material Thermal Degradation Models

2012· article· en· W2158499891 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 · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEpoxy Resin Curing Processes
Canadian institutionsChrysler (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSensitivity (control systems)Degradation (telecommunications)ThermalMaterials scienceEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceEngineeringThermodynamicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">Time-temperature analysis methods are usually applied to predict the useful life of automotive components. Components life is affected by exposure to heat during vehicle service life. The extent of reduction in component life, which may be caused by material thermal degradation, depends on the component temperature and the time duration at that temperature. The rate of material thermal degradation of automotive components varies widely depending on material thermal stability, vehicle duty cycle, and the thermal environment that the component is exposed to. Thermodynamic properties such as the activation energy of each material are used to determine the rate of thermal degradation [<span class="xref">1</span>,<span class="xref">2</span>]. In this approach, material thermal degradation models are used to predict component life during the service life of a vehicle. As the rate of thermal degradation increases with increasing material temperature, the useful life of a component will be reduced as the material temperature increases. Therefore, it is desired to keep the rate of thermal degradation low enough so that a certain level of component performance can be maintained at the end of the vehicle life. The acceptable performance level may be component dependent and vehicle dependent. For example, a passenger car will require different performance than a heavy duty truck even if same material is used on both vehicles. To maintain the required component performance, the definitions of “long term temperature goal” and “short term temperature goal” are introduced. Therefore, the factors affecting the predicted component life can be summarized as follows: measured component temperatures, material long and short term temperature limits (goals), material activation energy, and vehicle duty cycle. All of these factors typically have an inherent uncertainty. These uncertainties will affect the overall confidence level in the predicted time-temperature calculations. Therefore, it is the main purpose of this paper to estimate the uncertainty in component life predictions and their sensitivity to each of the input factors. Given these uncertainties, it is statistically possible to determine the most influential parameters and the overall uncertainty in the predicted component life. Several examples are given where the sensitivity/uncertainty analysis for different vehicle components are presented.</div></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 score0.242
Threshold uncertainty score0.388

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.226 · 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