MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889029677 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2017-0123

Optimum run parameters in cold strip rolling

2018· article· en· W2889029677 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
A. H. Falah, Emad Khorshid, Ahmed Elkholy

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetallurgy and Material Forming
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess (computing)Slip (aerodynamics)Control theory (sociology)Function (biology)Point (geometry)Computer scienceMechanical engineeringEngineeringMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The process of strip rolling is analyzed using engineering mechanics and the theory of plasticity, and presented through a closed form procedure. The effect of input running parameters on the process is presented quantitatively by explicit expressions. The presented expressions are simple to implement on any personal computer, and their execution time is fast. The procedure provides the tools for selecting optimal operating conditions and avoids defects that lead to failure. The minimum required friction to prevent roll-strip skidding is determined. Forward slip as a function of friction and the location of the neutral point on the roll was also determined. The results obtained from this study were found to agree reasonably well with those obtained from the literature. One application of the proposed analysis is demonstrated in the optimal design of cold strip rolling. The optimal solution improved the objective function of maximizing the process outcome by 696%.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.182 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicMetallurgy and Material FormingFrench-language works237,207