MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2321650857 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.90.174102

Solute-defect interactions in Al-Mg alloys from diffusive variational Gaussian calculations

2014· article· en· W2321650857 on OpenAlexafffund
Evgeniya Dontsova, Jörg Rottler, Chad W. Sinclair

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review B · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMicrostructure and mechanical properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsStatistical physicsKinetic Monte CarloMolecular dynamicsGranularityAtomic unitsNonlinear systemBinary numberPlanarGaussianMonte Carlo methodPhysicsComputer scienceQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resolving atomic-scale defect topologies and energetics with accurate atomistic interaction models provides access to the nonlinear phenomena inherent at atomic length and time scales. Coarse graining the dynamics of such simulations to look at the migration of, e.g., solute atoms, while retaining the rich atomic-scale detail required to properly describe defects, is a particular challenge. In this paper, we present an adaptation of the recently developed ``diffusive molecular dynamics'' model to describe the energetics and kinetics of binary alloys on diffusive time scales. The potential of the technique is illustrated by applying it to the classic problems of solute segregation to a planar boundary (stacking fault) and edge dislocation in the Al-Mg system. Our approach provides fully dynamical solutions in situations with an evolving energy landscape in a computationally efficient way, where atomistic kinetic Monte Carlo simulations are difficult or impractical to perform.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations29
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review BSame topicMicrostructure and mechanical propertiesFrench-language works237,207