MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220825037 · doi:10.1080/00325899.2022.2055888

Characterisation of the mechanisms taking place during liquid phase sintering of PM boron steels with the help of artificial intelligence

2022· article· en· W4220825037 on OpenAlexafffund
Simon Gélinas, Carl Blais

Bibliographic record

VenuePowder Metallurgy · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPowder Metallurgy Techniques and Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMaterials scienceSinteringEutectic systemMicrostructureMetallurgyDifferential scanning calorimetryBoronPowder metallurgyAlloyPhase (matter)Work (physics)Liquid stateThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Liquid phase sintering (LPS) of powder metallurgy (PM) components is a well-recognised strategy to enhance the densification of pressed-and-sintered compacts. This work reports the investigation on the liquid phase formation when a Fe–Ni–Mn–C–B master alloy (MA) is used as a boron carrier in combination with two iron base powders pre-alloyed with Mo. Through differential scanning calorimetry tests, quantitation of the microstructure with the help of artificial intelligence, as well as measurement of sintered density and strength as a function of sintering temperature, it was possible to unravel the mechanisms that take place before and during LPS. It was confirmed that a cascade of events takes place in the solid state prior to reaching the temperature necessary for a eutectic reaction to form a liquid. Additionally, the pre-alloyed Mo content was identified as a factor that modifies the initiation of LPS but not the LPS mechanisms per se.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePowder MetallurgySame topicPowder Metallurgy Techniques and MaterialsFrench-language works237,207