MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408388098 · doi:10.18280/ijdne.200202

Evaluating the Efficacy of Agro-Waste Derived Flux for Enhancing the Weldability of Steel – A Review

2025· review· en· W4408388098 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Temitayo S. Ogedengbe, Sunday A. Afolalu, Ting Tin Tin, Adekunle Akanni Adeleke, Omolayo M. Ikumapayi, Seun Jesuloluwa, Adeiza Avidime Samuel

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMetal Alloys Wear and Properties
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeldabilityFlux (metallurgy)Environmental scienceWaste managementMaterials scienceProcess engineeringEngineeringMetallurgyWelding

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Material failure often leads to disastrous consequences, but it can often be effectively prevented.The need to prevent material failure has sparked extensive research into strengthening engineered materials, leading to diverse approaches in material enhancement.Global population growth has intensified the demand for agricultural products, leading to increased environmental pollution and degradation over time.As a result, the use of these agricultural residues as flux materials has been explored in engineering applications.This study reviewed various techniques to enhance the structural integrity of carbon steels by incorporating agricultural waste products, notably date seeds, palm kernel shells, and banana peels.A comprehensive analysis was conducted on the engineering properties of these waste materials.The findings indicate that date seeds and palm kernel shells exhibit superior reinforcement capabilities, making them more effective in enhancing the performance of various steel types compared to banana peels.Consequently, it is advisable to consider the utilization of date seeds and palm kernel shells for engineering applications.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.934
Threshold uncertainty score0.398

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and EcodynamicsSame topicMetal Alloys Wear and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207