MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382752116 · doi:10.1016/j.jma.2023.05.010

Carbon nanotube and graphene reinforced magnesium matrix composites: A state-of-the-art review

2023· review· en· W4382752116 on OpenAlexaff
Lava Kumar Pillari, Kyle Lessoway, Lukas Bichler

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Magnesium and Alloys · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAluminum Alloys Composites Properties
Canadian institutionsOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceComposite materialCarbon nanotubeGraphenePowder metallurgyMagnesiumFabricationCastingNanomaterialsMicrostructureMetallurgyNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Magnesium (Mg) composites reinforced with carbon-based nanomaterial (CBN) often exhibit low density, enhanced strength, good conductivity, improved wear resistance, and excellent biocompatibility when compared to current industry Mg alloys. This review aims to critically evaluate recent developments in Mg-CBN composites and is divided into five sections: First, a brief introduction to Mg-CBN composites is provided, followed by a discussion of different fabrication techniques for these composites, including powder metallurgy, casting, friction stir processing, and selective laser melting. A particular focus is on the current processing challenges, including dispersion strategies to create homogeneous Mg-CBN composites. The effect of processing on the quantifying disorder in CBNs and distinguishing different sp2 carbon materials is also highlighted. Then, the effect of CBN on various properties of Mg-CBN composites is thoroughly analyzed, and the strengthening efficiency of CNTs and graphene in the Mg matrix is examined. Finally, the potential applications of Mg-CBN composites in various industries are proposed, followed by a summary and suggestions for future research directions in the field of Mg-CBN composites.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.842
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.233 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
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

Citations59
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Magnesium and AlloysSame topicAluminum Alloys Composites PropertiesFrench-language works237,207