MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990095932 · doi:10.1117/12.2042894

Laser-induced patterns on metals and polymers for biomimetic surface engineering

2014· article· en· W1990095932 on OpenAlexaff
Anne‐Marie Kietzig, Jorge Lehr, Luke Matus, Liang Fang

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicSurface Modification and Superhydrophobicity
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceWettingSurface micromachiningSurface roughnessLotus effectSurface finishNanotechnologyLaserFemtosecondLasing thresholdMicrometerContact angleComposite materialOpticsOptoelectronicsFabrication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One common feature of many functional surfaces found in nature is their modular composition often exhibiting several length scales. Prominent natural examples for extreme behaviors can be named in various plant leaf (rose, peanut, lotus) or animal toe surfaces (Gecko, tree frog). Influence factors of interest are the surface’s chemical composition, its microstructure, its organized or random roughness and hence the resulting surface wetting and adhesion character. Femtosecond (fs) laser micromachining offers a possibility to render all these factors in one single processing step on metallic and polymeric surfaces. Exemplarily, studies on Titanium and PTFE are shown, where the dependence of the resulting feature sizes on lasing intensity is investigated. While Ti surfaces show rigid surface patterns of micrometer scaled features with superimposed nanostructures, PTFE exhibits elastic hairy structures of nanometric diameter, which upon a certain threshold tend to bundle to larger features. Both surface patterns can be adjusted to mimic specific wetting and flow behaviour as seen on natural examples. Therefore, fs-laser micromachining is suggested as an interesting industrially scalable technique to pattern and fine-tune the surface wettability of a surface to the desired extends in one process step. Possible applications can be seen with surfaces, which require specific wetting, fouling, icing, friction or cell adhesion behaviour.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.216 · 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.

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

Citations16
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicSurface Modification and SuperhydrophobicityFrench-language works237,207