MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407158000 · doi:10.1016/j.mtla.2025.102355

In situ CLSM observation of Austenite microstructural evolution during hot deformation

2025· article· en· W4407158000 on OpenAlexafffund
Abhishek Arya, Muhammad Nabeel, A.B. Phillion

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterialia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrostructure and Mechanical Properties of Steels
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaTata SteelCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsMaterials scienceAusteniteIn situDeformation (meteorology)MetallurgyMicrostructureComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In-situ observations of microstructure evolution during the thermomechanical processing of low-carbon steel have been carried out using a high-temperature tensile testing system (HiTTS) integrated with a confocal laser scanning microscope (CLSM). Experiments were conducted within the temperature range between 800 to 1200 °C, and employing a strain rate of 0.001 s −1 to analyze the evolution of austenite microstructure at different temperatures and to identify the deformation and restoration mechanisms. The findings suggest that at temperatures below 900 °C, planar slip is the dominant deformation mechanism, and slip transfer is more favorable at twin boundaries than at grain boundaries. On the other hand, dynamic recrystallization (DRX) is identified as the primary restoration mechanism above 900 °C. The study identifies various nucleation sites for DRX grains, with triple junctions and grain boundaries serving as the nucleation sites at 900 °C. As the temperature increases to 1000 °C and above, new nucleation sites, such as inside annealing twin boundaries and free twin ends, are observed. The microstructure results suggest that the morphology of the twin boundary changes and loses its character during deformation. The role of annealing twin boundaries on DRX and bulging mechanisms associated with the various nucleation sites are discussed in great detail. Finally, the operational details, including temperature variations along the gauge length and thermal profile adjustments, including overshooting and undershooting and high-temperature surface reactions such as oxidation, decarburization, and evaporation, are meticulously examined.

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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.197
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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