MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297920542 · doi:10.31399/asm.cp.itsc2008p0456

The Effect of Undercooling on Solidification of YSZ Splats

2008· article· en· W4297920542 on OpenAlexaff
Hanzhao Liu, M. Bussmann, J. Mostaghimi

Bibliographic record

VenueThermal spray · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicAdvanced ceramic materials synthesis
Canadian institutionsCanadian Dairy Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupercoolingMaterials scienceRedistribution (election)ThermodynamicsYttria-stabilized zirconiaHeat transferMechanicsThermal equilibriumMetallurgyCubic zirconia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The impact and solidification history of individual YSZ particles has been the subject of many experimental and theoretical studies. Yet it is customary to assume that solidification occurs at the equilibrium temperature. Furthermore, the diffusion of the solute (yttria) in the liquid phase during solidification of a splat has not been considered. Using our model, we study non-equilibrium effects during the rapid solidification of a molten YSZ particle, by solving the so-called hyperbolic equations for heat and mass transfer. The hyperbolic model predicts the interface undercooling (due to thermal and solutal effects) and velocity as a function of time, as well as the yttria redistribution within the solid phase. Results are then compared to corresponding ones that we obtained from a parabolic model, in order to assess the extent to which YSZ solidification is influenced by non-equilibrium effects. Results indicate that these effects are limited to the early part of the solidification process when undercooling is most significant. At this stage, the interface velocity is unsteady, and solute redistribution is most evident. As solidification decelerates, the non-equilibrium effects wane and solidification can then be properly modeled as an equilibrium process.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.261

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThermal spraySame topicAdvanced ceramic materials synthesisFrench-language works237,207