MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2346178101

A residual stress study in similar and dissimilar welds

2016· article· en· W2346178101 on OpenAlexaff
Hamid Eisazadeh, Jeffrey R. Bunn, Harry Coules, Ajit Achuthan, John Goldak, D. K. Aidun

Bibliographic record

VenueExplore Bristol Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWelding Techniques and Residual Stresses
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResidual stressMaterials scienceWeldingMartensiteUltimate tensile strengthWeld lineComposite materialBase metalNeutron diffractionOptical microscopeMetallurgyStress (linguistics)DiffractionMicrostructureScanning electron microscopeOptics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Residual strain distributions in similar and dissimilar welds were measured using neutron diffraction (ND) method. Then, using three strain components, three-dimensional stress states were calculated. The results were used to determine the effect of the martensitic phase transformation and material properties on residual stress (RS) distribution. It was observed that smaller longitudinal RS was induced in the low carbon steel side of dissimilar weld when compared to its similar weld. Also, it was found that the transverse RS near and within the weld zone (WZ) in dissimilar weld exhibited a distinctive trend, with tensile mode reaching the yield strength of the base metal (BM). In order to characterize the WZ in dissimilar weld, optical microscopy, hardness, energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDAX) were employed. This study not only provides further insight into the RS state in similar and dissimilar welds; it also delivers important consequences of phase transformation in the latter case.

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 score0.005

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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations10
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExplore Bristol ResearchSame topicWelding Techniques and Residual StressesFrench-language works237,207