MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406402061 · doi:10.1080/2374068x.2025.2449774

A study on the influence of laser hardening on microstructure, and microhardness of additively manufactured H13

2025· article· en· W4406402061 on OpenAlexaff
Lamya Baali, N. Omidi, Noureddine Barka, Véronique Dassylva‐Raymond

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Materials and Processing Technologies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceIndentation hardnessMicrostructureMetallurgyHardening (computing)Composite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Laser surface treatment was employed as a promising approach to enhance the fatigue life of additively manufactured samples by increasing the surface hardness of the material. In this study, H13 tool steel was manufactured using the selective laser melting method, and lines of laser treatment were applied to the surface. Experimental and statistical approaches were utilised to investigate the microstructural changes, microhardness variations, and weld geometry resulting from different laser treatment processes. The aim was to control the laser parameters and analyse the behaviour of the microstructure and hardness profile of the laser-treated zone. The results revealed an amelioration in the hardness of the laser-treated surface, except for the heat-affected zone, which exhibited a lower hardness compared to the substrate. Statistical approaches were employed to study the effect of laser parameters on the weld geometry including width and depth of the laser-treated area using ANOVA method, elucidating the impact of each factor on these values. Finally, a predictive method for estimating the width and depth was proposed, to facilitate the adjustment of laser parameters for achieving specific outcomes, such as desired hardness profiles or geometrical characteristics, in the laser surface treatment process.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score0.526

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Materials and Processing TechnologiesSame topicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and ProcessesFrench-language works237,207