MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Experimental study of hot pressed sintered modified materials

2020· article· en· W3040841273 on OpenAlex
Xuezhi Tang, Z. J. Wang, Jy Yi, Yangyang Han, Y F Wang

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTribology and Wear Analysis
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSinteringMaterials scienceHot pressingMolding (decorative)PressingComposite materialRaw materialDie (integrated circuit)Composite numberPerpendicularMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The PTFE/Cu composite powder was selected as the experimental raw material, and the modified material PTFE/Cu with dense structure was prepared by hot pressing sintering process. The morphology of the product before and after the test was compared and observed by SEM. The effect of different material ratios on the densification results of the powder was studied, and the difference between molding and hot pressing sintering was analyzed. The results show that hot-pressed sintering can produce modified PTFE/Cu with a density of up to 99.9%, which is higher than that obtained by molding under the same pressure. The SEM image shows that, unlike the molding, hot-pressing sintering makes the crystal grains of the two materials exist independently in the modified polymer, and makes the powder crystal grains gradually perpendicular to the hot pressing direction.

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.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.213 · 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