MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416978219 · doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2025.115261

Additive manufacturing of refractory high-entropy alloys: A critical review of fundamentals and advances

2025· review· en· W4416978219 on OpenAlexafffund
Ali Mohammadnejad, Manyou Sun, Naga Aditya Yarlapati, Mahyar Hasanabadi, Esmaeil Sadeghi, Paria Karimi, Yu Zou, Ehsan Toyserkani

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials & Design · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHigh Entropy Alloys Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsRefractory metalsAerospaceRefractory (planetary science)FabricationSuperalloyBrittleness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Refractory high entropy alloys (RHEAs) hold immense potential as superior alternatives to existing superalloys in the nuclear, energy, and aerospace industries. However, the fabrication of refractory alloys and RHEA parts has long been hindered by challenges associated with brittleness and a high oxidation rate. Fortunately, additive manufacturing (AM) presents a transformative opportunity for these materials. In contrast to conventional methods, AM offers the advantage of fabricating intricate and near-net-shape parts without restrictions caused by high melting points and severe high-temperature oxidation of refractories. Consequently, numerous studies have explored the feasibility of printing RHEAs for various applications, with the majority demonstrating improved mechanical properties and the ability to engineer microstructures and compositions. Nevertheless, challenges exist in the AM of these alloys, including the formation of microcracks, pores and elemental loss, impeding the realization of their full potential. This paper aims to delve into the fundamentals of RHEAs, encompassing the preparation of RHEA powders, the printability of these alloys and a critical assessment of their properties. To overcome the RHEA printing issues, this paper reviews the integration of thermodynamic modeling, phase diagram calculations, and numerical modeling, followed by an evaluation of the potential applications of RHEAs based on their properties and costs.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations9
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterials & DesignSame topicHigh Entropy Alloys StudiesFrench-language works237,207