MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3171046045 · doi:10.1139/cjp-2020-0566

Influence of high-energy particles on copper and stainless steel in fusion reactor materials

2021· article· en· W3171046045 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Samah Radwan, H. El‐Khabeary

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicFusion materials and technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCopperFusionNeutron generatorNeutronScanning electron microscopeFusion powerNuclear fusionPhysicsDiffractionNeutron temperatureComposite materialPlasmaMaterials scienceAtomic physicsMetallurgyNuclear physicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many studies have focused on the effect of fusion plasma particles onto the structural materials of future nuclear fusion reactors. In this paper, the effect of the products of the first-generation fuel reaction on structural fusion materials, such as copper and 316-stainless steel target materials, was studied. Firstly, the effect of 14.1 MeV neutrons produced from D–T neutron generator for different irradiation times, 10, 20, 30, 50, and 60 min, was investigated. Hence, this effect was analyzed and characterized by X-ray diffraction analysis, surface roughness test, scanning electron microscope, and Vickers hardness. Secondly, the effect of 3.5 MeV α-particles on these target materials by different incident angles, 0°, 30°, 45°, 60° and 85°, using SRIM code was studied. Also, SRIM code was used to calculate α-particles’ trajectories, projected and straggle ranges, skewness, kurtosis, target ionization/phonons, and total displacements for copper and 316-stainless steel target materials.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicFusion materials and technologiesFrench-language works237,207