Uncovering all possible dislocation locks in face-centered cubic materials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dislocation reactions and locks play an important role in the plastic deformation and mechanical behavior of crystalline materials. Various types of dislocation locks in face-centered cubic (FCC) materials have been reported in the literature pertaining to material-specific molecular-dynamic simulations and high-resolution transmission electron microscopy observations. However, it is unknown how many dislocation locks are possible, and how immobile all the dislocation locks are, with respect to each other. Here we present a discrete mathematics-based approach to reveal all possible dislocation locks in the FCC crystal structure. Totally eight types of dislocation locks are uncovered, resulting from all possible reactions of mobile/glissile (namely, perfect and Shockley partial) dislocations with (a) non-coplanar Burgers vectors which reside on two slip planes intersecting at both obtuse and acute angles and (b) coplanar Burgers vectors. We redefine the degree of dislocation lock immobility based on misorientations between non-close-packed lock planes and close-packed {111} slip planes. The subsequently derived sequences for the dislocation lock immobility and formation tendency are rationalized by the reported experimental and dislocation-dynamics simulation results.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".