MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400723553 · doi:10.1080/19236026.2024.2350920

Effect of forming parameters on the corrosion performance of retrogression- and warm-formed AA7075 alloy sheets

2024· article· en· W4400723553 on OpenAlexafffund
Seyiwa Kope, Ibrahim G. Ogunsanya

Bibliographic record

VenueCIM Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAluminum Alloy Microstructure Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAlloyMaterials scienceCorrosionMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Retrogression forming (RF) and warm forming (WF) are used to remedy formability limitations of high-strength precipitation-hardened AA7075 alloy sheets. RF is a thermomechanical treatment combining retrogression heat treatment and the forming of initially peak-aged T6 temper. WF is a thermomechanical treatment of initially pre-aged temper. The present work examines the corrosion performance of retrogression- and warm-formed AA7075 alloy sheets by determining the optimal pre-aging temperature (80°C or 100°C), forming temperature (room temperature, 150–200°C), strain rate (1, 0.1, or 0.01 s−1), and heating rate (1.1 or 20°C·s−1) for conventional slow and novel fast-forming technologies. Several alternating- and direct-current electrochemical tests were administered, including electrochemical impedance spectroscopy, potentiodynamic polarization, and linear polarization resistance. Results showed that the corrosion performance (i.e., passive film and corrosion-resistant properties) of formed AA7075 sheets was directly proportional to pre-aging and WF temperatures, inversely proportional to the RF temperature, and mildly affected by strain/forming rate and heating rate during forming.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCIM JournalSame topicAluminum Alloy Microstructure PropertiesFrench-language works237,207