MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2180761661 · doi:10.3390/ma8115423

Hydrogenation Properties of TiFe Doped with Zirconium

2015· article· en· W2180761661 on OpenAlexafffund
Catherine Gosselin, Jacques Huot

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicHydrogen Storage and Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMaterials scienceAlloyZirconiumMicrostructureIntergranular corrosionScanning electron microscopeHydrogenMetallurgyDopingOxidePhase (matter)Chemical engineeringComposite materialOrganic chemistryChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of this study was to optimize the activation behaviour of hydrogen storage alloy TiFe. We found that the addition of a small amount of Zr in TiFe alloy greatly reduces the hydrogenation activation time. Two different procedural synthesis methods were applied: co-melt, where the TiFe was melted and afterward re-melted with the addition of Zr, and single-melt, where Ti, Fe and Zr were melted together in one single operation. The co-melted sample absorbed hydrogen at its maximum capacity in less than three hours without any pre-treatment. The single-melted alloy absorbed its maximum capacity in less than seven hours, also without pre-treatment. The reason for discrepancies between co-melt and single-melt alloys was found to be the different microstructure. The effect of air exposure was also investigated. We found that the air-exposed samples had the same maximum capacity as the argon protected samples but with a slightly longer incubation time, which is probably due to the presence of a dense surface oxide layer. Scanning electron microscopy revealed the presence of a rich Zr intergranular phase in the TiFe matrix, which is responsible for the enhanced hydrogenation properties of these Zr-doped TiFe alloys.

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 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.832

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations46
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterialsSame topicHydrogen Storage and MaterialsFrench-language works237,207