The Aqueous Electrochemical Response of TiC–Stainless Steel Cermets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A family of TiC–stainless steel ceramic–metal composites, or cermets, has been developed in the present study, using steel grades of 304 L, 316 L, or 410 L as the binder phase. Melt infiltration was used to prepare the cermets, with the steel binder contents varying between 10–30 vol. %. The corrosion behaviour was evaluated using a range of electrochemical techniques in an aqueous solution containing 3.5 wt. % NaCl. The test methods included potentiodynamic, cyclic, and potentiostatic polarisation. The corroded samples were subsequently characterised using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS), while the post-corrosion solutions were analysed using inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectroscopy (ICP-OES) to determine the residual ionic and particulate material removed from the cermets during electrochemical testing. It was demonstrated that the corrosion resistance was enhanced through decreasing the steel binder content, which arises due to the preferential dissolution of the binder phase, while the TiC ceramic remains largely unaffected. Increasing corrosion resistance was observed in the sequence TiC-304 L > TiC-316 L > TiC-410 L.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".