MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2950573657 · doi:10.11648/j.ijmea.20190702.13

A Study of Mechanical Properties Evaluation for Stainless Steel Under Low Temperature Region

2019· article· en· W2950573657 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jung Soo Oh

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Applications · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Engineering and Vibrations Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport
KeywordsElongationUltimate tensile strengthMaterials scienceAtmospheric temperature rangeTension (geology)Maximum temperatureStiffeningComposite materialMetallurgyMeteorologyThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For equipment operated in extreme weather regions such as Eastern Europe, Northern Russia, and Canada, etc. (with average temperature is colder than –20°C during winter), measures against freezing are necessary for the materials that compose plant modules and metal materials for the components of automobiles. However, only a portion of research on the effects at high temperatures have been performed in the cases of high-speed tension tests for cryogenic materials until now with the effects at low temperature being confirmed only to the extent of the presence of differences at high and low speeds. In this study, characteristics of two universal materials for stainless steel, namely TP304 and TP316, at low temperature were examined by executing comparative tests on their mechanical characteristics at both ordinary temperature and low temperature. As a result, TP304 displayed a secondary stiffening phenomenon in the low temperature range. Meanwhile, TP316 displayed a reduction in the elongation ratio in the low temperature and it was confirmed that the maximum tensile strength increased more so than at ordinary temperature. Regarding temperature dependency, the maximum tensile strength and elongation ratio were higher for TP304, while the yield strength was higher for TP316.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.262
Threshold uncertainty score0.537

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Mechanical Engineering and ApplicationsSame topicMechanical Engineering and Vibrations ResearchFrench-language works237,207