The Missing Intelligence Layer

Every major industry built a digital brain.
Metals never did. We're changing that.

METALLAI turns weeks of metallurgical trial-and-error into overnight answers. Physics-aware AI for alloy prediction and inverse design — so engineers stop guessing and start designing, on the first try.

80%
Fewer experiments
to hit target properties
17×
Faster design search
with quantum-hybrid AutoForge
1st
Trial success in our
validated 42CrMo4 case
$30B+
Lost each year to scrap
& rework globally
9 free metallurgy calculators — no sign-up, no email The same expressions that run inside the engine. Plus a full worked example and the product guide.
Why Now

Pharma has computational discovery. Semiconductors have process simulation.
Metals still run on trial & error.

Every alloy, every heat, every process window — still figured out one melt at a time. Decades of metallurgical intuition are retiring out of the industry with nowhere to go.

Pharma → Computational Discovery Semiconductors → Process Simulation Aerospace → Digital Twins Metals → Still Trial & Error

— The Cost of Trial & Error

Alloy Optimization
~5trials
To meet customer specs via composition + heat treatment
New Alloy Discovery
100+trials
To develop & qualify a new alloy composition
Cost per Scrapped Heat
$1–1.5K
Material, energy, labor & testing wasted per failed trial
New Alloy Program Cost
$10M+
Total cost for a full alloy development program
Time per Optimization
2–6weeks
Each failed trial → scrap, delays, and re-testing
Development Timeline
10–20yrs
From lab concept to certified, commercially available alloy
Annual Industry Loss
$30B+
Lost globally to scrap & rework in metals manufacturing
Knowledge Crisis
56avg age
Skilled metallurgists retiring — expertise lost with no transfer

— What METALLAI Changes

Without AI
  • Multiple trials to hit spec
  • Each off-spec heat → scrapped
  • Weeks of delay per order
  • Relies on senior metallurgist intuition — no digital record
With METALLAI
  • 1–2 high-confidence trials
  • Off-spec heats rescued by adjusting heat treatment
  • Predictions in seconds
  • Expertise captured as computable knowledge
80%
Fewer experiments to hit target properties
1st
Trial success in our validated use case
42CrMo4 steel hit target hardness on trial #1 — confirmed by lab.
METALLAI V2.0 · Platform

Five modules. One intelligence layer.

Prediction, fatigue analysis, inverse design, welding consumable selection, and an AI assistant that chains them together — built on the same physics-aware backbone, deployed end-to-end in the browser.

⚙
Module 1 · Available Now

Mechanical Predictor

Composition + process + heat treatment → full mechanical property profile with calibrated uncertainty bands. Hybrid ML + physics, not a black box.

  • YS, UTS, hardness (HV), elongation with a ±1σ spread
  • Hall-Petch grain-boundary strengthening decomposition
  • Zener-Hollomon hot-working physics (forging / rolling)
  • Chvorinov / Niyama / SDAS for casting routes
  • Process feasibility gate (Ac1/Ac3, solidus/liquidus)
  • Domain-distance trust scoring (Mahalanobis)
∿
Module 2 · Available Now

Fatigue Predictor

High-cycle and low-cycle fatigue life from composition + heat-treatment + stress state. Defect-sensitive, surface-condition-aware, R-ratio aware.

  • S-N curves & endurance limits with confidence bands
  • Basquin (HCF) + Coffin-Manson (LCF) HT-aware coefficients
  • Murakami √area for defect-driven cases (castings)
  • Goodman / Gerber mean-stress correction
  • Paris LEFM for crack growth screening
  • Carries seamlessly from mechanical predictions
🔁
Module 3 · AutoForge

Inverse Alloy Design

Flip the question. Give AutoForge target properties — it returns feasible composition + process recipes, ranked by trade-offs you choose.

  • Differential Evolution + Bayesian Optimization + quantum-hybrid search
  • Pareto-front trade-off landscape (cost / manufacturability / properties)
  • Fatigue & weldability gated into the search loop
  • Process-route aware: forging vs casting vs rolling
  • 17× faster design search vs. classical evolutionary methods
  • Auto-generated certification-ready PDF reports
⚡
Module 4 · AutoWelding · AutoFlux

Welding Consumable & HAZ Predictor

Ranked consumable recommendations + predicted weld-zone properties + defect-mode probabilities. Built for offshore, Arctic, and sour service.

  • Ranked filler-metal candidates (AWS A5.x classification)
  • Weld-zone YS / UTS / HV / EL / CVN with p10/p90 bands
  • CVN target temperatures from +20°C (room) to −100°C (LNG cryogenic)
  • Defect probabilities: porosity, HAC, sol-cracking, reheat cracking, lamellar tearing, LoF
  • PWHT suggestions tied to alloy + service environment
  • Carries from multilayer base-metal predictions (full audit chain)
◆
Module 5 · METALL · AI Assistant

Conversational Metallurgy Copilot

Talk to your alloy data in plain English. METALL runs predictions, chains multi-step analyses, and explains the physics behind every answer.

  • Runs Mechanical / Fatigue / Multilayer / AutoForge / AutoWelding on command
  • Chains workflows: mechanical → multilayer → welding in one conversation
  • Carry-from-prior-prediction: no re-typing composition
  • Explains the metallurgy behind every prediction (Hollomon-Jaffe, Koistinen-Marburger, etc.)
  • User-confirmed write actions (you approve every job before it runs)
  • Two tiers: Basic (fast) and High (deep reasoning)
Physics & analysis methods inside
Hall-Petch Zener-Hollomon Hollomon-Jaffe Koistinen-Marburger Andrews Ac1/Ac3 Basquin Coffin-Manson Murakami √area Goodman / Gerber Paris LEFM Chvorinov Niyama Caceres SDAS Gibson-Ashby Mahalanobis Trust SHAP Explainability
How AutoForge Works

Give us the targets.
Get back a family of feasible routes.

Engineers don't ask "what are the properties?" — they ask "how do I achieve them?" AutoForge inverts the problem: from target window to composition + process, in seconds.

01

Define Targets

Set yield, UTS, elongation, hardness — plus composition & process constraints.

02

Virtual Exploration

Quantum-hybrid search scans millions of composition + process combinations autonomously.

03

Physics Validation

Every candidate gated by thermodynamic, kinetic & weldability checks. No hallucinations.

04

Pareto-Ranked Results

A family of feasible routes — balanced, aggressive, cost-optimal. You pick the trade-off.

"AutoForge doesn't hand you one answer. It hands you the trade-off landscape — and lets the engineer decide."
Validated Use Cases

From our LinkedIn series:
real alloys, real labs, real numbers.

Two case studies showing METALLAI in action — one for forward prediction, one for inverse design. Both experimentally validated or benchmarked against industry practice.

Use Case #1 · Prediction

Can AI Reduce Alloy Development to a Single Trial?

Alloy: 42CrMo4 · Quench & Temper steel

Target window: 285–340 HB hardness, 880–1080 MPa UTS. Traditional approach would need 5–10 iterations.

292HV
Predicted hardness
280–290HB
Measured in lab ✓
927MPa
Predicted UTS (within target)
±3.7%
Model confidence
Outcome: hit the target window on trial #1. Not just prediction — physics-aware alloy design with ~80% tempered martensite microstructure confirmed by lab.
Use Case #2 · Inverse Design

Same Alloy. Same Composition. Different Performance.

Alloy: 300M · Ultra-high-strength aerospace steel

Targets: 1150 MPa YS, 1300 MPa UTS, 13% elongation. AutoForge returned two legitimate process routes — balanced vs. aggressive.

2
Pareto-optimal routes
17×
Faster than classical search
92s
Quantum-hybrid runtime
1,611s
Classical runtime (same quality)
Outcome: same solution quality, a fraction of the compute. CE, Pcm & fatigue flagged up-front — trade-offs made explicit, not discovered on the shop floor.
The Impact

Strength. Manufacturability. Reliability.
All on the table — at the same time.

METALLAI doesn't just predict numbers. It surfaces the three-way trade-off that every metallurgist knows exists but rarely sees quantified.

80%

Fewer experiments

To hit a target property window — validated on 42CrMo4 and benchmarked on 300M aerospace steel.

17×

Faster design search

Quantum-hybrid annealing reaches the same Pareto front in 92 s vs. 1,611 s classically.

9 / 12

Blind plant pilot

Hardness predictions inside the measured band on 12 forged steels, predicted with no access to the results. Mean absolute error 4.4%.

Validation

Measured, not asserted.
Including the parts we get wrong.

Every number below comes from a held-out test — alloys or S–N curves the model never saw during training. Fit to data you trained on is not accuracy, so we do not quote it.

19 / 27

Published aerospace grades

Served yield strength within ±10 % of handbook typicals. 22 of 27 within ±11 %, 10 of 27 within ±5 %.

±19 %

On an alloy never seen

Yield error with whole alloys held out of training. The in-sample figure is 6–7 % — that measures fit, not accuracy.

9 / 12

Blind plant pilot

Hardness inside the measured band on 12 forged steels at a Turkish forging plant, predicted with no access to the results. Mean absolute error 4.4 %.

45 / 75 %

Fatigue life within 2×

Steel / aluminium, on S–N conditions held out whole. Within 3×: 66 % and 83 %. Fatigue scatter of 2–4× on life is normal in test data.

100 / 96 %

P10 design life held

Measured lives exceeded the P10 life on held-out steel / aluminium rows, against a 90 % target. P10 is the number to design to.

Where it is weak

Published here for the same reason it is printed in every report: a tool that hides its failure modes cannot be used for engineering.

  • Over-aged 7xxx tempers (T73, T7451) read 9–10 % high on yield — the unsafe side. A warning fires on every affected run.
  • Precipitation-hardening stainless at H1025 reads about 15 % low, below the AMS minimum.
  • Notched fatigue lives read optimistic. Take them as an upper bound, not a design life.
  • Above roughly 107 cycles in aluminium the engine returns “beyond model range” rather than a number, because its training data does not reach there.
  • Titanium, nickel and superalloys are not in the corpus. The platform declines instead of extrapolating into them.
  • Runs gate at screening or process comparison confidence. Design allowables remain MMPDS and AMS — METALLAI sits upstream of them.

Held-out protocol: whole alloys, or whole S–N conditions (alloy + process + heat treatment together), removed from training before scoring — so no same-curve leakage.

What engineers said
after running their own process through it.

Translated from the original messages. We do not name the companies, and we have not tidied the hesitation out of the second one — a pilot that ends in “let’s look again” is a normal pilot, and pretending otherwise would be the one dishonest thing on this page.

I went through it, and I even ran one of our own processes through it. Excellent work — genuinely successful.
Process engineerSteel producer
I showed it to my manager and he liked it. We looked at one of our own processes and it made good observations. Then I showed him the assistant — we asked a few basic questions and it explained them. He was impressed.
Process engineerSteel producer
Developing a new material takes us far too much time. For any company with fatigue problems, or an alloy development programme, this is an enormous opportunity.
Materials engineerAerospace manufacturer

Every quote comes from an engineer who ran one of their own production processes through the platform — not from a demo dataset.

Same Engine. New Frontier.

Can we design alloys that don't exist yet?

Not magic — the same physics-aware search, pointed at a blank slate instead of a known grade.

◉ Today

Predict & Optimize

Hit a target window inside a known alloy family. Composition + process → properties.

→
◆ AutoForge

Inverse Design

Feasible composition + process routes — with fatigue, weldability & uncertainty gated in.

→
✦ Next

Novel Alloys

The inverse engine proposes compositions outside the catalogue — from targets alone.

From prediction to design — bridging physics, data, and decisions.

Backed by & built with

METALLAI Logo
KWORKS Logo
Koç University Logo

Check our arithmetic
before you trust anything larger.

Nine calculators, free and ungated — no account, no email form. They run the same expressions the METALLAI engine does, and each one states the range it is valid over instead of extrapolating past it.

Weldability

Carbon equivalent — CE(IIW) & Pcm

Weldability screening, preheat indication and hydrogen-cracking risk from composition.

Heat treatment

Critical temperatures — Ac1, Ac3, Ms

Austenitising window and martensite start, by the Andrews relations — with a warning when your steel is outside the range they were fitted to.

Heat treatment

Hardenability — Grossmann DI

Ideal critical diameter, real quench severity and the core martensite fraction for your section size.

Heat treatment

Tempering parameter — Hollomon–Jaffe

Trade tempering hours for degrees — and get told when the target crosses Ac1 or lands in an embrittlement band.

Fatigue

Murakami √area endurance limit

Defect-initiation threshold from hardness and defect size, surface or internal — and what shrinking the defect really buys.

Fatigue

Goodman diagram & mean stress

Goodman, Soderberg, Gerber and the first-cycle yield check on one Haigh diagram — including the case all three fatigue criteria quietly pass.

Testing

Hardness → tensile strength

HV and HBW to UTS, published as the range measured across 1,089 real alloys. The textbook ×3.2 is right for 51 % of steels.

Microstructure

Hall–Petch — grain size to strength

With the effective barrier size for martensite packets and bainite laths. The prior-austenite grain you measured reads 2.2× low.

Welding

Weld cooling time t8/5 & preheat

EN 1011-2, with the 2D/3D transition handled — thin plate cools slower than thick, and that is where most of these go wrong.

Why these are free. A calculator behind an email form is a calculator nobody uses. If they are useful, the full prediction — properties, fatigue life, weldability and standards from one composition — is one click away and also has a free tier.

Read a real report → A case at the model's edge Product guide
Questions engineers ask

Alloy property prediction,
answered straight.

Can AI predict the mechanical properties of an alloy from its composition?
Yes, within stated limits. METALLAI computes a metallurgical-physics baseline — strengthening mechanisms, phase transformation, defect-driven fatigue — and a machine-learning layer corrects the residual against measured data. On 27 published aerospace grades the served yield strength landed within ±10 % for 19 of them. On an alloy the model has never seen, held out whole from training, yield error is ±19 %. Composition alone is not enough: the process route and heat-treatment schedule move the answer more than small composition changes do.
How accurate is machine-learning fatigue life prediction?
On S–N conditions held out whole from training, METALLAI predicts fatigue life within a factor of 2 for 45 % of steel rows and 75 % of aluminium rows, and within a factor of 3 for 66 % and 83 %. Fatigue scatter is intrinsically wide — a factor of 2 to 4 on life is normal in test data — so the design number is the P10 life rather than the median. Measured lives exceeded P10 on 100 % of held-out steel rows and 96 % of aluminium rows, against a 90 % target.
What is inverse alloy design?
Forward design predicts properties from a known composition and route. Inverse design runs the other way: you state the properties you need and the constraints you must work within, and the engine searches composition and process space for recipes that reach them. METALLAI's AutoForge runs differential evolution, Bayesian optimisation and quantum-hybrid annealing in parallel and returns manufacturable candidates carrying cost, manufacturability, weldability and fatigue outlook — not just a chemistry. Candidates far from any measured neighbour are flagged as extrapolations to be lab-verified.
Is METALLAI a replacement for CALPHAD or Thermo-Calc?
No. CALPHAD tools compute thermodynamic equilibria accurately but too slowly to screen thousands of compositions or process routes. METALLAI is built for the screening stage: seconds per prediction, so you can explore a design space before committing to physical trials or to a detailed thermodynamic study. The two are complementary — screen wide here, then go deep where it matters.
Can it be used for design allowables or certification?
No, and every report says so. Each run self-grades against four tiers — screening, process comparison, pre-production and certification — and in practice runs gate at screening or process comparison. Design allowables remain MMPDS and AMS. METALLAI sits upstream of them, compressing the search before physical work begins; the coupons still decide.
Which alloys does METALLAI cover?
Steel and aluminium today, across wrought, cast, forged, rolled, cold-worked and welded routes. Titanium, nickel, cobalt and superalloys are on the roadmap. Where a material sits outside the training corpus the platform declines to answer rather than extrapolating silently — which is the behaviour you want from anything you are going to cut metal against.
Is METALLAI free to use?
There is a free tier: run mechanical property predictions in the browser, no installation. Full auditable reports, fatigue analysis and AutoForge inverse design are part of the paid plans. Open the app and try it on a grade you already know — that is the fastest way to judge it.

See METALLAI on your own alloy.

Launch the browser predictor, or request a tailored demo with our team.

⚛ Launch METALLAI V2.0 Request a Demo

Worked Examples

The honest way to judge a prediction platform is to read one of its reports end to end — including the places where it hedges, and the places where it tells you not to use the number at all.

Our worked example is a real material-substitution study, anonymised: a component turning at about 1,700 rpm for twenty hours a day, where the question was whether an aluminium alloy could replace precipitation-hardening stainless without losing fatigue margin.

  • Four candidate alloys compared on yield, tensile, hardness and elongation
  • Fatigue assessed at the real duty cycle — roughly 625 million cycles a year
  • Every warning the platform raised, reproduced verbatim
  • The two points where it refused to give a design answer, and why that is the useful result
Read the full worked example →
Preliminary Results

Inverse Design & Process Optimization

Engineers rarely ask “what are the properties?” They ask “how do I reach them?” AutoForge inverts the question: give it a target window and it returns compositions and process routes that land inside it — ranked by whether your shop can actually run them.

  • Target-driven recipes: composition, solution and ageing schedule, quench medium, cooling rate
  • Pareto-ranked candidates, so a conservative route and an aggressive one sit side by side
  • Manufacturability screened before ranking — carbon equivalent, hydrogen-cracking risk, fatigue
  • Three searches in parallel: differential evolution, Bayesian optimisation, quantum-hybrid annealing — the same Pareto front in 92 s against 1,611 s classically

AutoForge proposes; it does not certify. Every candidate carries the same uncertainty as a forward prediction, and a route with thin training coverage is labelled thin rather than ranked as though it were proven. Validate on a trial melt before committing tooling.

Inverse Design

R&D Acceleration

A screening prediction takes seconds. That changes which questions are worth asking — a design space that would have cost a year of trial melts can be narrowed before the first one is poured.

  • Thousands of virtual conditions overnight, on your own compositions and routes
  • Physics-aware search: chemistries that cannot exist are rejected, not returned
  • The trade-off between strength, ductility, weldability and fatigue, visible at once
  • Traceable results — which physics fired, what data supported it, and how far the input sits from anything in training

Where this sits: screening and process comparison, ahead of the laboratory rather than in place of it. Design allowables remain MMPDS and AMS. The longer goal is alloys that do not exist yet — the same search pointed at a blank slate instead of a known grade.

R&D Acceleration

Who We Are

METALLAI sits between a metallurgist’s judgement and a laboratory schedule. We compute a physics baseline that states its own assumptions, correct it with machine learning trained only on measured data, and return the number together with how much of it to trust.

We are metallurgists and machine-learning engineers working from the KWORKS incubator at Koç University in Istanbul. The platform began with an observation any plant manager will recognise: the knowledge that decides a heat treatment usually lives in a few senior engineers’ heads, and it leaves when they do.

  • Physics first, machine learning second. Strengthening mechanisms, transformation temperatures and defect-initiated fatigue are computed before any model runs; the model corrects what is left over.
  • Open, citable training data. Roughly 830 steel and 466 aluminium mechanical records, each traceable to its source.
  • Accuracy quoted on alloys held out of training. ±19 % on yield for an alloy the model has never seen. The in-sample figure is 6–7 % and we do not quote it — it measures fit, not accuracy.
  • It declines rather than extrapolates. Outside the range it was fitted on, the platform says so instead of returning a confident number.
Global Network

Request a Demo

See METALLAI V2.0 run on one of your own alloys, with your composition and your process route. Leave an email and company below and we normally reply within one working day with a session built around your part.

⚛
METALLAI
Mechanical & fatigue property
prediction from composition
and process route

✓ Carbon & alloy steels
✓ Stainless steels
✓ Aluminium alloys
○ Titanium — V3.0
○ Nickel superalloys — V3.0

Steel and aluminium today. Outside them the platform declines rather than extrapolating.

Let's talk.

Curious to see METALLAI on your own alloy? → metallai.com · let's talk.

METALLAI

KWORKS — Koç University Entrepreneurship Center
Istanbul, Türkiye

linkedin.com/company/metallai
app.metallai.com · Free calculators

Tell us the alloy, the process route and the property you need to hit. If it is outside steel or aluminium we will say so rather than book a call.