MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Improving parent-austenite twinned grain reconstruction using electron backscatter diffraction in low carbon austenite

2024· article· en· W4404471905 on OpenAlexafffund
Ruth Birch, T. Ben Britton, Warren J. Poole

Bibliographic record

VenueScripta Materialia · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrostructure and Mechanical Properties of Steels
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersBritish Columbia Knowledge Development FundNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsMaterials scienceElectron backscatter diffractionAusteniteElectron diffractionDiffractionMetallurgyMicrostructureOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thermomechanical controlled processing (TMCP) is widely used to optimize the final properties of high strength low alloy (HSLA) steels, via microstructure engineering. The room temperature microstructures are influenced by the high temperature austenite phase, and the austenite microstructure can be accessed by reconstruction using electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD) data of the final microstructure. A challenge for reconstruction of the parent austenite grain (PAG) microstructure and subsequent austenite grain size measurement is the presence of austenite-phase annealing twins, and we address this challenge with a new ‘re-sort’ algorithm. Our algorithm has been validated using the retained austenite regions (which were recovered via advanced pattern matching of EBSD patterns). We demonstrate that the re-sort algorithm improves the PAG reconstruction significantly, especially for the grain boundary network and correlation with other methods of grain size assessment and development of TMCP steels.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.217
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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScripta MaterialiaSame topicMicrostructure and Mechanical Properties of SteelsFrench-language works237,207