<i>In Situ</i> Atomic-Scale Observation of 5-Fold Twin Formation in Nanoscale Crystal under Mechanical Loading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide A 5-fold twin is usually observed in nanostructured metals after mechanical tests and/or annealing treatment. However, the formation mechanism of a 5-fold twin has not been fully elaborated, due to the lack of direct time-resolved atomic-scale observation. Here, by using in situ nanomechanical testing combined with atomistic simulations, we show that sequential twinning slip in varying slip systems and decomposition of high-energy grain boundaries account for the 5-fold twin formation in a nanoscale gold single crystal under bending as well as the reversible formation and dissolution of a 5-fold twin in a nanocrystal with a preexisting twin under tension and shearing. Moreover, we find that the complex stress state in the neck area results in the breakdown of Schmid’s law, causing 5-fold twin formation in a gold nanocrystal with a twin boundary parallel to the loading direction. These findings enrich our understanding of the formation process of high-order twin structures in nanostructured metals.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".