MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048157064 · doi:10.1016/j.jmrt.2020.07.066

Nanoindentational and conventional mechanical properties of spark plasma sintered Ti–Mo alloys

2020· article· en· W3048157064 on OpenAlexafffund
Mehdi Shahedi Asl, Seyed Ali Delbari, Maziyar Azadbeh, Abbas Sabahi Namini, Mehdi Mehrabian, Van‐Huy Nguyen, Quyet Van Le, Mohammadreza Shokouhimehr, Mohsen Mohammadi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Materials Research and Technology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicTitanium Alloys Microstructure and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMaterials scienceAlloyMolybdenumRelative densityUltimate tensile strengthSpark plasma sinteringFlexural strengthComposite materialTitanium alloyTitaniumPhase (matter)MetallurgyMicrostructure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The densification behavior and mechanical properties of spark plasma sintered titanium-molybdenum alloys were investigated in this paper. All Ti-(4, 8, 12, 16, and 20 wt%) Mo samples were sintered at 1200 °C for 5 min under 50 MPa. A significant relative density of 99.9% was secured for the Ti-based alloy with 16 wt.% Mo. The overall trend of hardness was similar to that of the relative density as Ti-16 wt.% Mo alloy showed the highest hardness values of 372 HV30 and 592 HV0.3 in macro (30 kg) and micro scales (300 g), respectively. Maximum ultimate tensile strength values (852 MPa at room temperature and 600 MPa at 600 ℃) belonged to the Ti-8 wt.% Mo sample. Such an observation was related to the formation of β-Ti phase and the strain-induced transformation phenomenon. The highest flexural strength of ∼2 GPa belonged to the Ti-12 wt.% Mo alloy, which may be a result of solid solution formation between Ti and Mo. Finally, average values of nano hardness, elastic modulus, and stiffness of various phases available in the samples with 12 and 20 wt% Mo were calculated through nano-indentation technique and the former specimen presented higher values in all the mentioned qualities.

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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations49
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Materials Research and TechnologySame topicTitanium Alloys Microstructure and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207