MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280651836 · doi:10.3390/met12050823

Effect of the Annealing Process on the Microstructure and Performance of 5056 Aluminum Alloy Wires

2022· article· en· W4280651836 on OpenAlexaff
Gaosong Wang, Chong Peng, Boyang Zhang, Zhaoyu Xu, Qiangqiang Li, Kun Liu, Pengwei Lu

Bibliographic record

VenueMetals · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAluminum Alloy Microstructure Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities
KeywordsRecrystallization (geology)Annealing (glass)AlloyMaterials scienceMicrostructureMetallurgyAluminiumGrain size

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recrystallization can affect the mechanical properties of aluminum alloys by changing the grain structure, and even the secondary recrystallization will cause a sudden change in the grain size in the alloy. In this work, by choosing different annealing treatments on the cold-drawn 5056 aluminum wire, the microstructure evolution in the alloy homogenized at different annealing processes was discussed, and its influence on the mechanical properties was tested. The results demonstrated that the different annealing treatments had a great effect on the recrystallized structure in the 5056 aluminum alloy. During the annealing, it was observed that the recrystallization started at 250 °C and completed at 310 °C, leading to a significant decrease in the mechanical properties. When the temperature was further increased to 530 °C, the secondary recrystallization occurred, and the grain size of the secondary recrystallization was larger than that when the annealing temperature was 560 °C. However, there was only a minor decrease in the mechanical properties. The reasons and laws of the secondary recrystallization are analyzed and discussed in this paper.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.334

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMetalsSame topicAluminum Alloy Microstructure PropertiesFrench-language works237,207