MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408432451 · doi:10.1016/j.aime.2025.100160

Hybrid investment casting of Al-Cu-Sc alloy-based lattice structures: Material and process characterization

2025· article· en· W4408432451 on OpenAlexafffund
Yuan Li, Marcelino Dias, Shirin Dehgahi, Sajid Ullah Butt, H. Henein, Ahmed Jawad Qureshi

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSyncrude
KeywordsAlloyMaterials scienceInvestment castingCharacterization (materials science)Lattice (music)MetallurgyComposite materialNanotechnologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper characterizes the development and optimization of a hybrid investment casting approach tailored for accurately crafting lattice structures with Al-4.5 wt pct Cu-0.4 wt pct Sc alloy, emphasizing precision in mold making, complex surface detailing, and porosity reduction. The core of the research is the description of the manufacturing procedure and the dimensional optimization strategies associated with this hybrid cast lattice geometries. After exploring the lattice shape produced through this advanced casting method, this research explores the microstructural properties and the solidification cooling rate of this hybrid investment casting. Furthermore, this work also addresses the complexity of the manufacturing protocol and the dimensional refinement method. • Developed a hybrid investment casting process for Al-4.5 wt %Cu-0.4 wt %Sc alloys. • Achieved high dimensional accuracy and low porosity in lattice structures. • Surface roughness optimized using different inner pattern materials and treatments. • Solidification cooling rate affects microstructure and secondary dendrite arm spacing. • Degassing system significantly reduced porosity in both joint and strut regions.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score0.963

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Industrial and Manufacturing EngineeringSame topicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207