MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Failure Analysis of Powder Metal Steel Components

2008· book-chapter· en· W4240423688 on OpenAlexaff
S. Ashok, S. Sriram

Bibliographic record

VenueASM International eBooks · 2008
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Failure Analysis and Simulation
Canadian institutionsCanadian Fasteners Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPowder metallurgyMetallurgyCase hardeningHardening (computing)Materials scienceEngineeringForensic engineeringComposite materialHardness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This chapter reviews failure aspects of structural ferrous powder metallurgy (PM) parts, which form the bulk of the PM industry. The focus is on conventional PM technology of parts in the density range of 6 to 7.2 g/cc. The chapter briefly introduces the processing steps that are essential to understanding failure analysis of PM parts. This is followed by a section on case hardening of PM parts. The methods used for analyzing the failures are then discussed. Some case studies are given that illustrate different failures and the methods of prevention of these failures.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueASM International eBooksSame topicMechanical Failure Analysis and SimulationFrench-language works237,207