MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026509806 · doi:10.2351/1.4729169

Laser hole sealing of commercially pure grade 1 titanium

2012· article· en· W2026509806 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Laser Applications · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser Material Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceLaserElectrolyteTitaniumLaser drillingCoalescence (physics)Laser ablationPenetration depthComposite materialProcess windowWeldingPenetration (warfare)AblationMicrostructureMetallurgyOptoelectronicsOpticsDrillingElectrode

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hermetically sealed Ti capsules filled with electrolyte solutions are required in many medical device applications. The laser hole sealing process is well suited for this type of application. There is, however, a lack of understanding of the laser hole sealing mechanism, especially in the presence of an electrolyte medium. In this study, the mechanism of the laser hole sealing process was investigated by characterizing the surface morphology and cross-sections of welds made both with and without electrolyte. It was shown that the laser sealing mechanism transitions from (i) no sealing due to insufficient energy; (ii) the coalescence of the weld pool and the onset of sealing; (iii) increasing penetration depth up to full penetration; and (iv) laser ablation and drilling. Laser hole sealing in the presence of electrolyte decreases the size of the process window for suitable laser energies and affects the microstructure of the sealed hole.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.305
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.247 · 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