MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412714632 · doi:10.2172/2573235

Developing tools and process controls to manufacture energy-efficient powders for additive manufacturing feedstocks

2025· report· en· W4412714632 on OpenAlexaff
Chris Tyler, Ritin Mathews, Chris Aldridge, Rob Carter

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsFédération des Comités de Parents du Québec
FundersOak Ridge National LaboratoryUT-BattelleOffice of Energy EfficiencyU.S. Department of EnergyOffice of Energy Efficiency and Renewable EnergyBattelle
KeywordsProcess engineeringProcess (computing)Manufacturing engineeringManufacturing processComputer scienceMaterials scienceEngineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditionally, metal powders have been produced through methods such as grinding, atomization, and electrolysis. In contrast to these techniques, Metal Powder Works, Inc. has pioneered a methodology based on metal cutting. This innovative approach utilizes a vibrating cutting tool to machine metal particles, in the form of chips, from a workpiece. This technique allows for control of powder particle size, morphology, and avoids any thermally induced material changes. This collaboration aims to elucidate metal cutting characteristics and assess performance on tough materials like Inconel alloys. Computational models, using FEA and SPH techniques, will be developed initially, focusing on aluminum alloy (Al 7075- T6) for studying mesh sensitivity, cutting forces, and chip morphology.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207