MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138348123 · doi:10.1109/lpt.2007.893044

High-Quality Flat-Top Micromachining of Silica by a CW CO$_{2}$ Laser

2007· article· en· W2138348123 on OpenAlexafffund
Lütfü Ç. Özcan, Vincent Tréanton, Raman Kashyap, L. Martinů

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Photonics Technology Letters · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser Material Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGroove (engineering)Surface micromachiningMaterials scienceLaserSubstrate (aquarium)Laser ablationLaser beam machiningSurface (topology)OpticsPolymerOptoelectronicsComposite materialLaser beamsFabrication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This letter demonstrates a simple and fast technique that dramatically improves the micromachined surface quality of silica substrates processed by a continuous-wave CO$_{2}$laser. When sufficient laser power is directed at the surface of a sample, its temperature increases beyond the boiling point. Melted material is ejected and a groove is created. Some of the ablated material redeposits on each side of the groove, altering the surface quality of the substrate. To circumvent this problem, we deposit a polymer overlay as a sacrificial film which protects the surface during the ablation process, resulting in a flat surface on either side of the groove at very high writing speeds. The grooves can be used as an aid to passive alignment for an optical fiber, as diffractive optical elements or to create high-quality microfluidic chips.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations10
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Photonics Technology LettersSame topicLaser Material Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207