Zirconium Production and Technology: The Kroll Medal Papers 1975–2010
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Description This one-of-a-kind publication provides 30 peer-reviewed, award-winning papers from recipients of the William J. Kroll Zirconium Medal, named in honor of Dr. William J. Kroll, one of the foremost metallurgists of the 20th Century. The Kroll Medal was established to recognize outstanding achievement in the scientific, technological, or commercial aspects of zirconium production and utilization, and to encourage future efforts, studies, and research. These peer-reviewed papers cover all aspects of zirconium technology, including history, ore refinement, production, fabrication, mechanical properties, and physical properties. Many of the early papers deal with state-of-the-art ore refinement and Zr production processes, and the later papers with highly sophisticated metallurgical and scientific technologies. Of the 33 medals awarded, 31 have been for work in the commercial nuclear power industry. This retrospective covers work conducted in the United States, Canada, Japan, Russia, and Western Europe, including, France, Germany, Sweden, and United Kingdom. The papers include a whole range of zirconium alloy technical topics, including: Taken overall, the papers provide a comprehensive technical history of zirconium technology and will be of great interest to both young and experienced workers in the field.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it