MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401158894 · doi:10.18280/acsm.480306

Study of Surface Hydrogenation Effect on Fatigue Crack Initiation in ASTM 904L Austenitic Stainless Steel Under Cyclic Loading (Bending-Torsion)

2024· article· en· W4401158894 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mustafa Sami Abdullatef

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnales de Chimie Science des Matériaux · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFatigue and fracture mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceTorsion (gastropod)Cyclic stressComposite materialAusteniteAustenitic stainless steelFatigue testingMetallurgyStructural engineeringCorrosionMicrostructureEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In an austenitic stainless steel type ASTM 904L that was cathodically hydrogenated, outgassed, and subsequently tested, the initiation of fatigue cracks was investigated.Tests were run with 50Hz combined loads (bending and torsion) and were paused at different periodsof fatigue life to allow scanning electron microscopy inspection of the gage surface of the samples (SEM).Slip marks were not visible on the surface of the hydrogenated and outgassed material, in contrast to the non-hydrogenated fatigued material.Its tired gage surface has consistently been related with the pre-existing hydrogen-induced fissures and has shown the "peeling off" of extremely thin layers in various locations from the start of the fatigue life.However, it was discovered that the major fatigue crack began subsurfacely, most likely along the boundary between the ductile material inside and the hydrogen-hardened exterior layer.It seems unlikely that the hydrogen-induced surface cracks will be employed as a tool to simulate the fatigue behavior of short fractures in austenitic stainless steels because they do not grow on their own.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnales de Chimie Science des MatériauxSame topicFatigue and fracture mechanicsFrench-language works237,207