MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392538006

THE ANNEALING OF IRRADIATION DAMAGE IN ZIRCALOY-2 AND THE EFFECT OF HIGH TEMPERATURE IRRADIATION ON THE TENSILE PROPERTIES OF ZIRCALOY-2

2024· report· en· W4392538006 on OpenAlexaff
L. M. Howe

Bibliographic record

VenueOSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) · 2024
Typereport
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNuclear Materials and Properties
Canadian institutionsAtomic Energy (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIrradiationAnnealing (glass)Materials scienceUltimate tensile strengthZirconium alloyComposite materialMetallurgyRadiochemistryChemistryNuclear physicsAlloy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tensile specimens of annealed and cold-worked Zircaloy2 were irradiated at 380 tained C with 9.5 x 10//sup 19/ n/cm/sup 2/ and tested at room temperature. Annealed samples of Zircaloy-2, irradiaied at 280 tained C with 7.7 x 10/sup 19/ n/cm/sup 2/ and at 50 tained C with 9.1 x 10/sup 19/ n/cm/sup 2/, were given isothermal and isochronal post-irradiation anneals and then tested at room temperature. The annealed and cold-worked specimens irradiated at 380 tained C exhibited only a small amount of radiation damage in contrast to specimens irradiated at or below 280 tained C which experienced considerable irradiation hardening. Results on the cold-worked material irradiated at 380 tained C indicated that the amount of normal thermal recovery of cold-work which occurred during the irradiation was virtually identical to that which occurred during an out-pile analysis of the post- irradiation annealing data for the 50 and 280 tained C irradiations revealed that in both cases the radiation damage anneals out in the range 250 to 400 tained C and is characterized by a single activation energy of approximately 2 ev throughout this range. (auth)

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.607

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.206 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information)Same topicNuclear Materials and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207