MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2173123663 · doi:10.1179/174329304x8702

Isothermal solidification during transient liquid phase bonding of Inconel 738 superalloy

2004· article· en· W2173123663 on OpenAlexfundno aff
O.A. Ojo, N.L. Richards, M.C. Chaturvedi

Bibliographic record

VenueScience and Technology of Welding & Joining · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHigh Temperature Alloys and Creep
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMaterials scienceSuperalloyIsothermal processInconelEutectic systemMetallurgyBorideBrazingPrecipitationLiquid metalDiffusionAlloyPhase (matter)MicrostructureBase metalTransient (computer programming)ThermodynamicsWelding

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An investigation was carried out on transient liquid phase brazing of IN-738 superalloy with Ni–Cr–B filler. Conventional models used to model the Transient Liquid Phase (TLP) bonding process assume that boride precipitation does not occur during the joining process. However, a significant deviation from this assumption was observed in all brazed samples as extensive intragranular and intergranular precipitation of chromium and boron rich particles was observed to occur within the base alloy in regions beside the braze/ base metal interface. Application of two diffusion models to the isothermal solidification stage was successful in reasonably predicting the time required to achieve complete isothermal solidification of the liquid insert, which is vital in preventing the formation of deleterious centreline eutectic. Diffusion analysis showed that the boron rich particles formed as a result of substantial solute diffusion into the base metal before equilibration of the liquid–solid phases.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations83
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScience and Technology of Welding & JoiningSame topicHigh Temperature Alloys and CreepFrench-language works237,207