MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3111799600 · doi:10.1557/s43578-020-00087-0

A review on the recent advances concerning the fatigue performance of titanium alloys for orthopedic applications

2021· review· en· W3111799600 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Leonardo Contri Campanelli

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of materials research/Pratt's guide to venture capital sources · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicTitanium Alloys Microstructure and Properties
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Materials ResearchUniversidade de São PauloFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São PauloPetrobrasConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoInstituto Tecnológico de AeronáuticaUniversité Laval
KeywordsMaterials scienceTitanium alloyOsseointegrationMicrostructureAlloySurface roughnessTitaniumMetallurgyComposite materialImplant

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article presents a review on recent advances in the fatigue behavior of Ti alloys, especially the main commercial compositions for orthopedic applications. In the case of well‐known Ti–6Al–4V alloy, the major concern is related to the effect of the surface modification necessary to improve the osseointegration. The introduction of surface discontinuities due to the growth of a porous oxide layer, or the roughness development, may severely affect the fatigue performance depending on the level of alteration. In the case of additive manufactured Ti–6Al–4V, the fatigue response is also influenced by inherent defects of as‐built parts. Regarding the recently developed metastable β alloys, information about the fatigue properties is still scarce and mainly related to the effect of second phase precipitates, which are introduced to optimize the mechanical properties. The fatigue behavior of the Ti alloys is complex, as is their microstructure, and should not be neglected when the alloys are being developed or improved to be applied in medical devices.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations51
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of materials research/Pratt's guide to venture capital sourcesSame topicTitanium Alloys Microstructure and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207