MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3122512623 · doi:10.1115/1.4049853

Microstructural Evaluation of Alloy 800H After SCWL Exposure

2021· article· en· W3122512623 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daniela Marušáková, Claudia Aparicio, R. Fukač

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNuclear Materials and Properties
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectron backscatter diffractionAlloySupercritical fluidScanning electron microscopeMaterials scienceMicrostructureRaman spectroscopyMetallurgyComposite materialChemistryOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Alloy 800H is a candidate material for supercritical water-cooled reactors (SCWR), specifically for in-core components in Canadian-type SCWR, that will operate at a pressure of 25 MPa and a core temperature from 350 °C to 625 °C. To evaluate this, several exposures to supercritical water took place at 395 °C and 25 MPa in a supercritical water loop (SCWL). The duration of each exposure was 500, 150, and 1000 h. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) with electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD), in combination with Raman spectroscopy (RS) and X-ray diffraction (XRD), was used to evaluate the microstructure of alloy 800H after the exposures to supercritical water. All these methods confirmed the presence of magnetite and trevorite/chromite crystals, with a thickness of less than 1 μm, on the surface after each exposure. No significant change occurred after the second and third exposures. The matrix crystallography did not change during the exposures and demonstrated grain twinning with a grain size of 100–400 μm.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation ScienceSame topicNuclear Materials and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207