MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386093979 · doi:10.1002/adem.202300615

Deformation Behavior of 3D‐Printed High‐Entropy Alloys: A Critical Review

2023· review· en· W4386093979 on OpenAlexafffund
Dhruv Bajaj, Aihan Feng, Shoujiang Qu, Zhuo Chen, Dongyang Li, D.L. Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Engineering Materials · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHigh Entropy Alloys Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaToronto Metropolitan University
FundersAlberta InnovatesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMaterials scienceHigh entropy alloysPlasticityDeformation (meteorology)Deformation mechanism3d printedCrystal twinningMicrostructure3D printingDuctility (Earth science)NanotechnologyComposite materialCreepEngineeringManufacturing engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 3D‐printing of high‐entropy alloys (HEAs) is capable of enhancing the design and manufacturing flexibilities for novel materials. Owing to the rapid solidification, the 3D‐printed HEAs exhibit markedly different microstructures than their conventionally‐manufactured equivalents, leading to peculiar mechanical properties. Many additively manufactured HEAs also break down the strength‐ductility trade‐off dilemma. Novel dynamics regarding the simultaneous and sequential nature of deformation mechanisms are emerging through recent intensive research on these materials. Herein, the deformation behavior of 3D‐printed HEAs is reviewed and explained on the basis of the latest advances in this area. A comprehensive picture regarding the role of cellular dislocation networks, twinning‐induced plasticity, and transformation‐induced plasticity in the monotonic and cyclic deformation of 3D‐printed HEAs is presented. Special emphasis is placed on fatigue characteristics due to the enormous interest in this burgeoning area. The effect of postfabrication thermomechanical processing on plasticity is discussed along with the microstructural evolution in the 3D‐printed HEAs. Several innovative developments that carry latent potential for further research are also deliberated in this review. Finally, the present understanding of the deformation behavior of 3D‐printed HEAs is summarized while gauging the future directions.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations21
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced Engineering MaterialsSame topicHigh Entropy Alloys StudiesFrench-language works237,207