MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3132952200 · doi:10.3139/146.110639

A model to calculate the viscosity of silicate melts

2012· article· en· W3132952200 on OpenAlexaff
Eli Brosh, Arthur D. Pelton, Sergei A. Decterov

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Materials Research (formerly Zeitschrift fuer Metallkunde) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetallurgical Processes and Thermodynamics
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBorosilicate glassViscosityAlkali metalTernary operationMaterials scienceOxideSilicateThermodynamicsGibbs free energyMineralogyChemical engineeringChemistryComposite materialMetallurgyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Our recently developed model for the viscosity of borosilicate melts is extended to describe and predict the viscosities of melts containing alkali oxides. In addition to the two model parameters that are required for each B2O3–MO x melt, where MO x is a basic oxide, three more parameters are needed when MO x is an alkali oxide to account for the formation of clusters near the tetraborate composition. The additional parameters represent the size and Gibbs energy of formation of these clusters and their contribution to the activation energy of the viscous flow. A general algorithm for the calculation of the viscosity is presented which summarizes the application of the viscosity model to melts that can contain two network formers, SiO2 and B2O3, any basic oxide and amphoteric oxides exhibiting the Charge Compensation Effect such as Al2O3. The predictive ability of the model is tested on all ternary subsystems of the B2O3–Na2O–K2O–CaO–MgO–PbO–ZnO–Al2O3–SiO2 system containing both an alkali oxide and B2O3 for which experimental data are available and on several multicomponent glass-forming melts around commercial glass compositions.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations30
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Materials Research (formerly Zeitschrift fuer Metallkunde)Same topicMetallurgical Processes and ThermodynamicsFrench-language works237,207