MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3139985589 · doi:10.1111/jace.17828

(W <sub>1‐x</sub> ,M <sub>x</sub> )C carbides with desired combinations of compatible density and properties – A first‐principles study

2021· article· en· W3139985589 on OpenAlexaff
Ruiliang Liu, Dong Zhang, Yunqing Tang, Xinhu Tang, Edward Humphries, Dongyang Li

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Ceramic Society · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced materials and composites
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsHardfacingMaterials scienceCarbideTungstenTungsten carbideThermal conductivityTransition metalComposite materialMetallurgyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Tungsten monocarbide (WC) is one of the highly valuable hard materials for industry, widely used as reinforcement in hardfacing overlays, thermal spray coatings, composites, and various alloys. However, its large density leads to the inhomogeneous distribution of WC particles in the metal‐matrix hardfacing overlays. It is highly wished to have appropriate reinforcing phases with an optimal combination of high strength, compatible density, and physical properties. In this study, we tailored WC by partially substituting W with 3d and 4d transition metals through first‐principles calculations. It is demonstrated that WC can be tailored by element‐substitution with desired properties. Identified stable carbides possess lowered density and mechanical properties that are comparable to those of WC. Physical properties, for example, the Debye temperature, Grüneisen parameter, and thermal conductivity, of the tailored carbides are also studied for widened applications. Efforts are made to generate comprehensive information on metal‐substituted with elucidated underlying mechanisms through analyzing the corresponding electronic characteristics.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations11
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Ceramic SocietySame topicAdvanced materials and compositesFrench-language works237,207