Plasma pressure scaling of laser ablation generated surface acoustic waves
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary form only given, as follows. Acoustic probing of materials is a powerful tool in investigating material characteristics and in identifying and locating internal defects in materials. Laser produced plasmas can be employed in order to generate large amplitude acoustic pulses in the material. Large plasma pressures can be generated at the surface even with millijoule level laser pulses leading to large acoustic amplitudes as compared to thermoelastically driven waves, which are often employed. We are studying the application of surface acoustic waves (SAWs) for the non-contact single-surface probing of materials. However, the relation between the amplitude of the SAW and the plasma pressure which excites the wave must be established. UV laser ablatively driven SAWs on aluminum are being studied, generated with either a KrF laser at a wavelength of 248 nm or a 4th harmonic Nd:YAG laser at a wavelength of 266 nm with laser pulse energies in the range of 1 to 60 mJ. The scaling of the SAW amplitude as a function of laser pulse energy and intensity has been measured. In order to compare the experimentally measured SAW waveforms with theoretical expectations a numerical model has been developed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".