MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982794522 · doi:10.2174/1876531901103010042

Femtosecond Laser-Induced Nanowelding: Fundamentals and Applications

2010· article· en· W1982794522 on OpenAlexaff
Anming Hu, Y. Zhou, W. W. Duley

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Open Surface Science Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser Material Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFemtosecondMaterials scienceNanoparticleLaserIrradiationNanoengineeringRaman spectroscopyNanometreNanotechnologyUltrashort pulseAnalytical Chemistry (journal)OpticsChemistryComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fundamentals of femtosecond laser pulse and nanoparticles are analyzed by a two-temperature model. Ultrafast surface melting, surface nanoengineering and shock wave impact are evident in the surface of graphite by femtosecond irradiation. The interaction between femtosecond laser pulses and Au/Ag nanoparticles has been investigated. Two effects are identified at different intensities: photofragmentation at rather high intensity (~10 14 W/cm 2 ), nanojoining at low intensity (~10 10 W/cm 2 ). Photofragmentation forms a large number of tiny nanoparticles with an average size of tens of nanometers. Control over irradiation conditions at intensities near 10 10 W/cm 2 results in nanojoining of most of the nanoparticles. This nanojoining is obtained in both liquid solution and in solid state thin films assembled from nanoparticles. Nanojoining mechanism is further studied by joining Ag nanoparticles encapsulated by a polymer shell. Nonthermal melting is investigated. Nanojoined Au nanoparticles are expected to have numerous applications, such as probes for surface enhance Raman spectroscopy.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations50
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Open Surface Science JournalSame topicLaser Material Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207