MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408150946 · doi:10.3390/met15030278

Review of the Properties and Degradation Mechanisms of Refractories in Aluminum Reduction Cells

2025· article· en· W4408150946 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohamed Hassen Ben Salem, Gervais Soucy, Daniel Marceau, Antoine Godefroy, Sébastien Charest

Bibliographic record

VenueMetals · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBauxite Residue and Utilization
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à ChicoutimiAluminerie Alouette (Canada)Université de Sherbrooke
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologies
KeywordsCryoliteRefractory (planetary science)DurabilityAluminosilicateRefractory metalsMaterials scienceDegradation (telecommunications)AluminiumEnvironmental scienceMetallurgyComposite materialComputer scienceChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This review examines the degradation of refractory materials in aluminum reduction cells, focusing specifically on contamination caused by the cryolite-based bath. Aluminosilicate refractories, particularly Ordinary Refractory Bricks, play a vital role in maintaining the structural integrity and thermal balance of these cells under demanding operational conditions. The interaction between the molten bath and refractory linings leads to chemical reactions and mineralogical changes that modify the mechanical and thermal properties of the material over time. The study integrates findings from industrial autopsies, laboratory experiments, and a comprehensive review of the existing literature to identify and analyze the mechanisms of degradation. By analyzing the findings obtained from these methodologies, this review explores how cryolitic infiltration triggers transformations that compromise performance and reduce the lifespan of refractory linings. Covering a broad temperature range (665–960 °C), the study addresses key challenges in understanding bath-induced contamination and provides insights into how to improve the durability and efficiency of refractory materials in aluminum production.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMetalsSame topicBauxite Residue and UtilizationFrench-language works237,207