MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Study the Effects of Dielectric Type on the Machining Characteristics of γ-Ti Al in Electrical Discharge Machining

2017· article· en· W2770933727 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational journal of engineering research in Africa · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Machining and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectrical discharge machiningMachiningMaterials scienceKeroseneDielectricSurface roughnessScanning electron microscopeComposite materialIntermetallicSurface finishMetallurgyLiquid dielectricElectric dischargeElectrodeOptoelectronicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current study surveys the results of using deionized water and kerosene as dielectrics in the machining outputs of γ-TiAl intermetallic compound obtained in electric discharge machining. Influences of these different dielectrics properties on machining speed, tool wear, surface cracks and roughness were compared. Scanning electron microscopy micrographs were prepared to investigate influences of dielectrics on the surface characteristics of electrically discharged samples. Results indicate which by kerosene dielectric; the material removal rate (MRR) is further compared to another one. But deionized water as dielectric causes higher tool wear ratio than kerosene dielectric. Electrical discharged samples in deionized water have higher surface roughness, in addition it contains surface cracks, whereas kerosene dielectric results better surface finish in low pulse current. According to XRD spectra electric discharge machining in deionized water and kerosene dielectrics produces Ti 3 Al intermetallic compound on the produced surface.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score0.451

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.319 · 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