MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3088610018 · doi:10.1016/j.jmrt.2020.08.114

Austenite grain growth and hot deformation behavior in a medium carbon low alloy steel

2020· article· en· W3088610018 on OpenAlex

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 Materials Research and Technology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetallurgy and Material Forming
Canadian institutionsCégep de Sorel-TracyÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceDynamic recrystallizationIsothermal processFlow stressAusteniteMetallurgyDeformation (meteorology)Grain sizeStrain rateSofteningAlloyMicrostructureGrain growthAvrami equationArrhenius equationComposite materialThermodynamicsHot workingActivation energy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To examine the austenite grain growth behavior and kinetics under isothermal austenitization process in a low alloy medium carbon forged steel, heat treatments at different temperatures (1150, 1175, 1200, and 1260 °C) and times (5, 15, and 25 min) were conducted. An Arrhenius constitutive relationship was developed to analyze and predict the austenite grain size as a function of the austenitization temperature and time during isothermal austenitization. The model predictions agreed well with the experimental austenite grain size data. Following the austenitization examinations, the hot deformation behavior of the alloy was studied by performing isothermal compression tests for different soaking times (5, 15, and 25 min) at the deformation temperatures of 1150, 1175, and 1200 °C, at a constant strain rate of 0.05 s−1, and up to a true strain of 0.6. The microstructures of the hot compressed samples were assessed to determine the dynamic softening mechanisms and potential austenite grain refinement by dynamic recrystallization (DRX). Under the investigated hot deformation conditions, the flow stress curves and microstructure observations showed DRX characteristics. The flow curves from the peak to the steady-state stress were accurately predicted using a Johnson–Mehl–Avrami–Kolmogorov (JMAK) equation. Based on the flow curves and a mathematical equation, the DRX kinetics were also determined. Variations of the flow curves, DRX kinetics, and dynamic recrystallized (DRXed) grain size with the deformation temperature, strain, and the austenite grain size prior to deformation were analyzed.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.292

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.248 · 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