MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7114926167 · doi:10.1016/j.mtcomm.2025.114488

In-situ measurement of lengthening kinetics of Widmanstätten ferrite in low carbon steel

2025· article· en· W7114926167 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials Today Communications · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrostructure and Mechanical Properties of Steels
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsNucleationFerrite (magnet)AusteniteGrain boundaryMicrostructureOptical microscopeInterphaseCarbon steelScanning electron microscope

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study presents an automated image analysis framework to quantify the lengthening kinetics of Widmanstätten ferrite (WF) during continuous cooling of Fe–0.12C–2Mn steel. In-situ microstructures were captured using a high-temperature tensile testing system with confocal laser scanning microscope (HiTTS-CLSM). The framework integrates the open-source Segment Anything Model (SAM) for grain segmentation with the DeepLSD line segment detector for WF plate identification, enabling systematic analysis of 94 plates across 155 image frames. Four types of nucleation sites were observed at the specimen surface for WF plates. Surface observations showed nucleation appearing most frequently in austenite grain interiors (33 %), followed by nucleation at tips of existing WF plates (25.5 %), austenite grain boundaries (23.5 %), and allotriomorphic ferrite/austenite interphase boundaries (18 %). The measured lengthening rates ranged from 3 to 68 μ m/s within 730–630 ∘ C, falling between the maximum rates predicted under para-equilibrium (PE) and negligible partition local equilibrium (NPLE) conditions from modified Zener–Hillert equations. Statistical analysis revealed no significant differences in average lengthening rates across nucleation sites. The results also highlight that lengthening rate measurements are highly sensitive to the analysis method. This training-free approach significantly expands the scale of quantitative analysis compared to traditional manual methods and is applicable to transformations that produce sufficient surface relief and plate spacing above the effective resolution of the acquired images.

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)0.000
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.402

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterials Today CommunicationsSame topicMicrostructure and Mechanical Properties of SteelsFrench-language works237,207