A Novel Approach for Analyzing the Effects of Almen Intensity on the Residual Stress and Hardness of Shot-Peened (TiB + TiC)/Ti–6Al–4V Composite: Deep Learning
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the present study, the experimental data of a shot-peened (TiB + TiC)/Ti-6Al-4V composite with two volume fractions of 5 and 8% for TiB + TiC reinforcements were used to develop a neural network based on the deep learning technique. In this regard, the distributions of hardness and residual stresses through the depth of the materials as the properties affected by shot peening (SP) treatment were modeled via the deep neural network. The values of the TiB + TiC content, Almen intensity, and depth from the surface were considered as the inputs, and the corresponding measured values of the residual stresses and hardness were regarded as the outputs. In addition, the surface coverage parameter was assumed to be constant in all samples, and only changes in the Almen intensity were considered as the SP process parameter. Using the presented deep neural network (DNN) model, the distributions of hardness and residual stress from the top surface to the core material were continuously evaluated for different combinations of input parameters, including the Almen intensity of the SP process and the volume fractions of the composite reinforcements.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it