MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2226742455 · doi:10.4271/2001-01-0824

Simulation of Electromagnetic Forming of Aluminum Alloy Sheet

2001· article· en· W2226742455 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 technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser and Thermal Forming Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAluminiumAlloyElectromagnetic formingMetallurgyMaterials scienceComputer scienceMechanical engineeringEngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="htmlview paragraph">Electromagnetic forming of aluminum alloys provides improved forming limits, minimal springback and rapid implementation. The ability to predict the minimum energy required in electromagnetic forming is essential in developing an efficient process. Understanding the development of the strain distribution over time in the blank is also highly desired. A numerical model is needed that offers insight into these areas and the electromagnetic forming process in general that cannot easily be extracted from experiments.</div> <div class="htmlview paragraph">To address these concerns, ANSYS/EMAG is used to model the time varying currents that are discharged through the coil in order to obtain the transient magnetic forces acting on the blank. The body forces caused by electromagnetic induction are then used as the boundary condition to model the high velocity deformation of the blank with LS-DYNA, an explicit dynamic finite element code. At present a “loose coupling” is employed between ANSYS/EMAG and LS-DYNA to update geometry and body forces as loading proceeds.</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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.227 · 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