Bibliographic record
Abstract
Analytical models have been developed for the transformation kinetics, microstructure analysis and the mechanical properties in bainitic steels. Three models are proposed for the bainitic transformation based on the chemical composition and the heat treatment conditions of the steel as inputs: (1) thermodynamic model on kinetics of bainite transformation, (2) improved thermo-statistical model that eliminates the material dependent empirical constants and (3) an artificial neural network model to predict the volume fraction of bainite. Neural networks have also been used to model the hardness of high carbon steels, subjected to isothermal heat treatment. Collectively, for a steel of given composition and subjected to a particular isothermal heat treatment, the models can be used to determine the volume fraction of bainitic phase and the material hardness values. The models have been extensively validated with the experimental data from literature as well as from three new high carbon experimental steels with various alloying elements that were used in the present work. For these experimental steels, data on the volume fraction of phases (via X-ray diffraction), yield strength (via compression tests) and hardness were obtained for various combinations of isothermal heat treatment times and temperatures. The heat treated steels were subjected to compression and hardness tests and the data have been used to develop a new correlation between the yield stress and the hardness. It was observed that while all three experimental steels exhibit a predominantly nanostructured bainite microstructure, the presence of Co and Al in one of the steels accelerated and maximized the nano-bainitic transformation within a reasonably short isothermal transformation time. Excellent yield strength (>1.7 GPa) and good deformability were observed in this steel after isothermal heat treatment at a low temperature of 250C for a relatively short duration of 24 hours.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".