MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7128906144 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.18643322

Tipos de Pintura en Polvo y sus aditivos

2023· article· es· W7128906144 on OpenAlexaff
Mario Jose Correa-Quiceno

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2023
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMaterial Selection and Properties
Canadian institutionsInnovation, Science and Economic Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConceptual architectureAutomatic identification and data captureContext (archaeology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La pintura en polvo es una tecnología de recubrimiento ampliamente utilizada en la industria debido a su eficiencia, bajo impacto ambiental y excelentes propiedades mecánicas y anticorrosivas. Este artículo presenta una revisión técnica de los principales tipos de pintura en polvo, incluyendo sistemas termoestables y termoplásticos, sus características físico-químicas, aplicaciones industriales y criterios de selección. Se analizan las ventajas y limitaciones de cada sistema, así como los parámetros críticos de proceso que influyen en la calidad del recubrimiento final.

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)0.002
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicMaterial Selection and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207