MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092159649 · doi:10.3390/s110100032

Femtosecond Laser Filamentation for Atmospheric Sensing

2010· article· en· W2092159649 on OpenAlexafffund
Huai Liang Xu, See Leang Chin

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLaser-Matter Interactions and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersProgram for New Century Excellent Talents in UniversityFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsFilamentationFemtosecondSupercontinuumLaserOpticsMaterials scienceAbsorption (acoustics)Emission spectrumOptoelectronicsWavelengthSpectral linePhysicsAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Powerful femtosecond laser pulses propagating in transparent materials result in the formation of self-guided structures called filaments. Such filamentation in air can be controlled to occur at a distance as far as a few kilometers, making it ideally suited for remote sensing of pollutants in the atmosphere. On the one hand, the high intensity inside the filaments can induce the fragmentation of all matters in the path of filaments, resulting in the emission of characteristic fluorescence spectra (fingerprints) from the excited fragments, which can be used for the identification of various substances including chemical and biological species. On the other hand, along with the femtosecond laser filamentation, white-light supercontinuum emission in the infrared to UV range is generated, which can be used as an ideal light source for absorption Lidar. In this paper, we present an overview of recent progress concerning remote sensing of the atmosphere using femtosecond laser filamentation.

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 score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations162
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicLaser-Matter Interactions and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207