MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308865021 · doi:10.5267/j.esm.2022.9.002

Stress state of workpieces during upsetting with additional shear

2022· article· en· W4308865021 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEngineering Solid Mechanics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Technology and Methodologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceShear (geology)SchematicUltimate tensile strengthSlip (aerodynamics)Finite element methodShear stressStress (linguistics)Composite materialMetallurgyAlloyDeformation (meteorology)Structural engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article presents an analysis of the stress state of workpieces during upsetting of workpieces with an additional shear. For the analysis, the slip line method and the finite element method were used. A schematic diagram of upsetting in dies with “floating” elements, contributing to the implementation of additional shear, reduction of barreling, inhomogenous deformation and contour tensile stresses, is presented. The analysis of the research results showed that during upsetting of workpieces with additional shift forces, tensile stresses on the side surface of the workpieces decrease, which excludes the appearance of cracks on the side surface of the samples, especially when processing low-plastic alloy steels and alloys, and also reduces the barreling of the side surface.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.317
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.198
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