MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2766365430 · doi:10.1002/sia.6325

Application of quantitative X‐ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) imaging: investigation of Ni‐Cr‐Mo alloys exposed to crevice corrosion solution

2017· article· en· W2766365430 on OpenAlexafffund
Brad Kobe, Martin Badley, Jeffrey D. Henderson, Samantha Anderson, Mark C. Biesinger, D.W. Shoesmith

Bibliographic record

VenueSurface and Interface Analysis · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCorrosion Behavior and Inhibition
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsX-ray photoelectron spectroscopyCrevice corrosionMaterials scienceCorrosionAlloyOxideMetallurgyNanometreInertAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Chemical engineeringComposite materialChemistryEnvironmental chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores quantitative X‐ray photoelectron spectroscopy imaging on three different Ni‐Cr‐Mo Hastelloy® alloys (BC‐1, C‐22 and G‐30) with differing Cr and Mo contents. The alloys were subjected to a simulated critical crevice corrosion solution. Ni‐based alloys have been shown to exhibit excellent resistance to a range of corrosive media due to the formation of an inert oxide layer, primarily containing Cr and Mo. However, these alloys may rapidly corrode in the crevice environment produced by seams, gaskets or deposits of debris on the alloy surface. Understanding how the oxide film is influenced by the Cr and Mo content is crucial in determining an optimal alloy composition that reduces or suppresses the possibility of crevice corrosion. The protective oxide films are very thin in nature, generally several nanometers. XPS imaging was used to monitor changes in oxide film composition and to correlate the distribution of Cr and Mo to the grain structure of the alloys. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations19
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSurface and Interface AnalysisSame topicCorrosion Behavior and InhibitionFrench-language works237,207