MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2528538409 · doi:10.1016/j.dib.2016.09.042

Brief data overview of differently heat treated binder jet printed samples made from argon atomized alloy 625 powder

2016· article· en· W2528538409 on OpenAlexaff
Amir Mostafaei, Yashar Behnamian, Y. Krimer, Erica Stevens, Jing Luo, Markus Chmielus

Bibliographic record

VenueData in Brief · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersSwanson School of Engineering, University of PittsburghCommonwealth of Pennsylvania
KeywordsMaterials scienceMicrostructureSuperalloyAlloyRaw materialSinteringMetallurgyJet (fluid)Layer (electronics)Metal powderNickelCharacterization (materials science)Composite materialMetalNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Powder bed binder jet printing (BJP) is an additive manufacturing method in which powder is deposited layer-by-layer and selectively joined in each layer with binder. The data presented here relates to the characterization of the as-received feedstock powder, BJP processing parameters, sample preparation and sintering profile ("Effect of solutionizing and aging on the microstructure and mechanical properties of powder bed binder jet printed nickel-based superalloy 625" (A. Mostafaei, Y. Behnamian, Y.L. Krimer, E.L. Stevens, J.L. Luo, M. Chmielus, 2016) [1], "Powder bed binder jet printed alloy 625: densification, microstructure and mechanical properties" (A. Mostafaei, E. Stevens, E. Hughes, S. Biery, C. Hilla, M. Chmielus, 2016) [2]). The data presented here relates to the characterization of the as-received feedstock powder, BJP processing parameters, sample preparation and sintering profile. Effect of post heat treatments including solutionizing and aging on the microstructure and mechanical properties of powder bed binder jet printed nickel-based superalloy 625 were compared to that of sintered samples.

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)0.001
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: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.004

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.196 · 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
GenreDataset

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

Citations16
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueData in BriefSame topicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and ProcessesFrench-language works237,207