MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413036487 · doi:10.1177/03019233251357352

A critical review of the role of Mould current in the remelting processes

2025· review· en· W4413036487 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIronmaking & Steelmaking Processes Products and Applications · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced materials and composites
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurrent (fluid)Materials scienceEngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Until recently, analyses and control strategies of the remelting processes assumed that in the high temperature region the process current is completely contained in the path between the electrode and the ingot. It is now generally recognised that there is also a second path, electrode to mould (‘mould current’), which plays a significant role in both the process heat balance and process parameters, hence influencing the ingot structure. This report critically reviews the published experimental evidence and process analyses relating to the effect. In both the main processes, electroslag remelting and vacuum arc remelting, the mould current plays an important part in establishing ingot structure but in the present process operations it is neither measured nor controlled. It is postulated that further work directed towards control of the mould current is necessary for optimising reproducible ingot quality. It is further concluded that valid computational analyses of the processes must allow for the component of mould current.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.808
Threshold uncertainty score0.774

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.297 · 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