MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3156165098 · doi:10.3390/cryst11040453

Strain Accommodations among Twin Variants in Ti and Mg

2021· article· en· W3156165098 on OpenAlexaff
Ping Zhou, Guo‐zhen Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueCrystals · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMagnesium Alloys: Properties and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrystal twinningMaterials scienceShear (geology)Slip (aerodynamics)Strain (injury)Deformation (meteorology)Twin citiesCrystallographyComposite materialGeographyMicrostructureBiologyPhysicsChemistryAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The selection of twin variants has a great influence on deformation texture and mechanical property in hcp metals where slip systems are limited and twinning types are abundant during deformation. Local strain accommodations among twin variants are considered to shed light on variant selection rules in Ti and Mg alloys. Five kinds of strain accommodations are discussed in terms of different regions that are affected by the twinning shear of primary twin. These regions contain (I) the whole sample, (II) neighboring grain, (III) adjacent primary twin in neighboring grain, (IV) adjoining primary twin within the same parent grain, and (V) multi-generation of twinning inside the primary twin. For a potentially active variant, its operation needs not only relatively higher resolved shear stress but also easily accommodated strain by immediate vicinity. Many of the non-Schmid behaviors could be elucidated by local strain accommodations that variants with relatively higher SFs hard to be accommodated are absent, while those with relatively lower SFs but could be easily accommodated are present.

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)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCrystalsSame topicMagnesium Alloys: Properties and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207