MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414805184 · doi:10.1016/j.jmrt.2025.10.015

Simulating cast-like microstructure using laser powder directed energy deposition (LP-DED) – a critical step to enable LP-DED as a high-throughput screening tool for conventional Al alloy development

2025· article· en· W4414805184 on OpenAlexaff
Qingyu Pan, Monica Kapoor, John E. Carsley, Xiaoyuan Lou

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Materials Research and Technology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and Processes
Canadian institutionsNovelis (Canada)
FundersResearch and DevelopmentNovelis
KeywordsMicrostructureAlloyHomogenization (climate)Recrystallization (geology)CastingLaser

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Laser powder directed energy deposition (LP-DED) additive manufacturing (AM) has been proposed as a high-throughput tool to support combinatorial alloy synthesis. However, this approach cannot directly inform alloy development for traditional cast and wrought Al alloys due to vastly different microstructure and mechanical properties from the laser produced materials. In the present work, we propose a new manufacturing route of LP-DED to simulate cast-like microstructure of Al-Mn-Fe-Si alloy made by direct chill (DC) casting. By utilizing substrate heating and grain refinement, the optimized LP-DED alloy exhibited similar microstructure and mechanical response as DC-cast counterpart, under both as-built and homogenization conditions. The alloy also showed similar recrystallization dynamics and microstructure as DC-cast alloy under the same thermomechanical treatment. The results showed that the optimized LP-DED process can produce materials that share the similar microstructural characteristics and properties as its DC-cast counterpart. This method bridges the gap between laser AM and conventional casting processes, and for the first time makes LP-DED a feasible high-throughput screening tool for DC-cast Al alloy development.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.710

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Materials Research and TechnologySame topicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and ProcessesFrench-language works237,207