MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040353359 · doi:10.1117/12.377013

Mechanisms of laser cleaning

2000· article· en· W2040353359 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser Material Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLaserSpallationLaser ablationMaterials scienceEvaporationProcess (computing)Environmental scienceDetonationProcess engineeringShock waveAblationVaporizationComputer scienceOptoelectronicsOpticsExplosive materialAerospace engineeringChemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Laser cleaning is growing in importance with the introduction of the Montreal protocol which proposes the long term reduction on environmental and public health grounds in the use of organic solvents such as CFCs that are normally used in industrial cleaning. There is also significant interest in laser cleaning in the conservation of sculptures, paintings and museum objects where the process offers advantages in terms of time saving and the enhancement of the ability to conserve certain artefacts. To date there has been insufficient consideration of the mechanisms involved in laser cleaning and how their understanding could lead to improved control and efficiency of the laser cleaning process. This paper considers an overview of the processes involved and their relevance in the different cleaning situations encountered in practice, mainly in terms of the application short pulse length lasers. The mechanisms to be considered include, (1) photon pressure, (2) selective vaporization, (3) shock waves produced by rapid heating and cooling, (4) evaporation pressure, (5) plasma detonation (spallation), (6) ablation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.205 · 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