MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3095067200 · doi:10.14447/jnmes.v23i3.a04

Wear Behavior of Ni-TiO2 Nano-Composite Coating on AISI 1022 CS by Pulse Electrodeposition

2020· article· en· W3095067200 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
A. Jegan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of New Materials for Electrochemical Systems · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrodeposition and Electroless Coatings
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAll India Council for Technical EducationDepartment of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, India
KeywordsMaterials scienceDuty cycleScanning electron microscopeElectroplatingCurrent densityCoatingComposite materialComposite numberMetallurgyNano-Response surface methodologyPulse (music)VoltageLayer (electronics)Electrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Ni-TiO2 nano-coatings were prepared on the AISI 1022 carbon steel (CS) surface using the pulse electrodeposition method. The surface structure of CS was considerably reformed owing to the titanium particles presence. The electroplating is widely used as a protection of the material surface to expand the life of vehicle components. The parameters of pulse frequency (PF - Hz), current density (CD - A/cm2) and duty cycle (DC - %) are combined into the RSM three factors and three level arrays to find the effect of the wear rate coating parameters. The Ni-TiO2 nano-particles deposited surface structure and wear of the surface were examined by field emission scanning electron microscopy (FESEM) and wear test was conducted by pin on disc wear tester. The experimental result revealed a lower specimen wear rate of the parameter is the frequency: 20 Hz, current density: 0.2 A/cm2 and duty cycle: 30 %. The ANOVA result revealed the pulse frequency and current density quadratic term are the most essential factor contributing 28.48, 29.95 % impact on wear resistance.

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 score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of New Materials for Electrochemical SystemsSame topicElectrodeposition and Electroless CoatingsFrench-language works237,207