Electron work function: an indicative parameter towards a novel material design methodology
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Electron work function (EWF) has demonstrated its great promise in materials analysis and design, particularly for single-phase materials, e.g., solute selection for optimal solid-solution strengthening. Such promise is attributed to the correlation of EWF with the atomic bonding and stability, which largely determines material properties. However, engineering materials generally consist of multiple phases. Whether or not the overall EWF of a complex multi-phase material can reflect its properties is unclear. Through investigation on the relationships among EWF, microstructure, mechanical and electrochemical properties of low-carbon steel samples with two-level microstructural inhomogeneity, we demonstrate that the overall EWF does carry the information on integrated electron behavior and overall properties of multiphase alloys. This study makes it achievable to develop "electronic metallurgy"-an electronic based novel alternative methodology for materials design.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it