MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2938943451 · doi:10.1149/2.0851906jes

Ball Milled Si-W Alloys: Part I. Microstructural and Phase Evolution during Ball Milling

2019· article· en· W2938943451 on OpenAlexafffund
Yijia Liu, Benjamin Scott, M. N. Obrovac

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of The Electrochemical Society · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSemiconductor materials and interfaces
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBall millMaterials scienceMicrostructureBall (mathematics)MetallurgyAlloyTungstenSiliconChemical engineeringGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this first part of a two-part study of the synthesis, microstructure and electrochemical properties of ball milled silicon-tungsten alloys (Si 100-x W x , x = 15, 20, 25, 30), the ball milling process is discussed in detail. The phase evolution was quantitatively followed during milling, allowing for a detailed understanding of the ball milling process. A volume element model of the process was developed that uses only three parameters that are directly related to the milling conditions. This model was found to well explain the ball milling process and suggests that energy initially accumulates in the Si and W powders after every ball collision. Eventually the stored energy overcomes activation energy for the reaction of Si and W to form Si 2 W. The kinetics of these processes and the tendency for reactants to cake in the mill are important parameters to consider for the practical synthesis of different Si-metal alloy materials.

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 score0.004

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of The Electrochemical SocietySame topicSemiconductor materials and interfacesFrench-language works237,207