MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2778404187 · doi:10.12677/meng.2017.44032

Study of the Carol Lake Concentrate Sintering Test in Baosteel

2017· article· en· W2778404187 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
丽娟 阎

Bibliographic record

VenueMetallurgical Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIron and Steelmaking Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSinteringTest (biology)Environmental scienceMetallurgyMaterials scienceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

本文通过采用X射线衍射、扫描电子显微镜和矿相显微镜以及微型烧结等方法对加拿大卡罗尔湖精粉矿的试验研究,了解该种精粉矿的性能,在此基础上进行了烧结杯试验和工业试验,试验结果表明:卡罗尔湖精粉在一定的使用比例范围内可满足宝钢生产使用。 In this paper, by means of x-ray diffraction, scanning electron microscope, mineral phase micro-scope and micro-sintering, the performance of the Canadian carol lake concentrate was studied. On this basis, the sintering pot test and industrial test were carried out. The results show that the Carol lake concentrate can meet the needs of Baosteel in a certain extent.

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 score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.121

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMetallurgical EngineeringSame topicIron and Steelmaking ProcessesFrench-language works237,207