MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367856232 · doi:10.1016/j.jalmes.2023.100008

Al-Mn alloys for electrical applications: A review

2023· review· en· W4367856232 on OpenAlexafffund
Wutian Shen, Anita Hu, S. Liu, Henry Hu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Alloys and Metallurgical Systems · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAluminum Alloys Composites Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Windsor
KeywordsMaterials scienceMicrostructureManganeseUltimate tensile strengthBattery (electricity)AluminiumElectrical resistivity and conductivityMetallurgyAutomotive industryPhase (matter)Deformation (meteorology)Composite materialPower (physics)ThermodynamicsElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Development of lightweight Al alloys with high electrical conductivities, tensile properties and low cost are highly needed for market expansion of battery-powered electric vehicles (BEVs) in the automotive industry and durable transmission lines in the electric power industry (EPI). As an alloying element, Mn has a low maximum solubility of 1.25 wt% in Al under equilibrium solidification and forms Al6Mn dispersoid as a strengthening phase. Manganese (Mn) is usually introduced into wrought Al alloys such as AA3xxx series, because of its capability of improving uniform deformation and strengths of pure aluminum. In this article, the influence of Mn on the electrical and mechanical properties of Al alloys is discussed. The microstructure features and relevant electrical conductivities of Mn-containing Al alloys are reviewed. The strengthening mechanisms of Al alloys are overviewed. The cooling rate-dependent mechanical properties of Al-Mn alloys are presented.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations45
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Alloys and Metallurgical SystemsSame topicAluminum Alloys Composites PropertiesFrench-language works237,207