MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W46825032 · doi:10.5006/c2005-05087

Assessment of the Effect of Different Test Variables on the Measured KISSC Value

2005· article· en· W46825032 on OpenAlexaff
HA Ernst, Richard E. Bravo, T. Pérez, Claudio Morales, K. E. Szklarz, Gustavo Lopez Turconi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Applied Research
Canadian institutionsShell (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTest (biology)Value (mathematics)Reliability engineeringStatisticsMaterials scienceEngineeringMathematicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An experimental-analytical program was conducted to investigate the effect of different variables on the measured value of KISCC from the DCB test. Crack length evolution for different test conditions, i.e. different specimen thickness and initial arm displacement, was experimentally determined. Tests to determine the growth vs. no growth conditions in terms of the initial Kapplied were also conducted. The experimental results together with the characteristics of the electrochemical evolution of the solution-surface system, were used to feed a computer program previously developed, capable of predicting crack length evolution with time, and hence the instantaneously Kapplied, and finally the KISCC. The results seem to indicate that for a given material, the KISSC dependence on Kapplied could be explained in terms of the change of the subsurface concentration with time.

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)0.007
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations17
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEngineering Applied ResearchFrench-language works237,207