Critical Assessment 40: A search for the eutectic system of high-temperature cast aluminium alloys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A quest for the eutectic system of novel cast aluminium alloys, having high-temperature capabilities, is critically assessed with two potential candidates of Al–Al 3 Ni and Al–Al 11 Ce 3 examined and compared to the presently used Al–Si base. The conventionally cast Al–Al 3 Ni and Al–Al 11 Ce 3 eutectics do not exhibit the anticipated advantage over Al–Si in strengthening retention at temperatures up to 500°C. The promising differences between diffusivities of silicon, nickel, and especially cerium in aluminium, and eutectic melting temperatures, accompanied by high coarsening resistance of Al 3 Ni, Al 11 Ce 3 phases and the eutectic hardness retention are inconsistent with observed similarities in the temperature-related strengthening-reduction of all three eutectics. These findings will help defining the criteria for development of the eutectic system, suitable for future heat-resistant aluminium alloys.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".