MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2914702170 · doi:10.3390/ma12030506

Effect of Shear Strain Rate on Microstructure and Properties of Austenitic Steel Processed by Cyclic Forward/Reverse Torsion

2019· article· en· W2914702170 on OpenAlexaff
Zhang Zhimin, Qingshan Dong, Bo Song, Hong He, Linjiang Chai, Ning Guo, Bingshu Wang, Zhongwen Yao

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrostructure and Mechanical Properties of Steels
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMaterials scienceMartensiteMicrostructureAusteniteTorsion (gastropod)RodComposite materialWork hardeningUltimate tensile strengthHardening (computing)MetallurgyLayer (electronics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, commercial AISI 304 stainless steel rods were subjected to cyclic forward/reverse torsion (CFRT) treatments at low-speed and high-speed torsion at room temperature. Microstructures in the core and surface layers of the CFRT-treated samples were systematically characterized. Results show that the CFRT treatment can introduce martensite phase on the surface of the rods via strain-induced martensitic transformation. High-speed twisting is more effective in inducing martensite in the surface layer compared to low-speed twisting. During the stretching process, the overall strain-hardening behavior of the gradient material is related to the content of its gradient defects. Higher gradient martensite content results in a higher surface hardness of the material, but less overall tensile properties. The effect of twisting speed on torsion behavior and the strain-hardening mechanisms in tensile of the gradient structured steels was also addressed.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.180 · 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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterialsSame topicMicrostructure and Mechanical Properties of SteelsFrench-language works237,207