MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Material characterization with top-hat cw laser induced photothermal techniques: A short review

2010· review· en· W2155609288 on OpenAlexaff
Nelson G. C. Astrath, Jun Shen, Mauro Luciano Baesso, F. B. G. Astrath, L. C. Malacarne, P. R. B. Pedreira, A. C. Bento, J. Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermography and Photoacoustic Techniques
Canadian institutionsBC Innovation Council
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpacityLaserPhotothermal therapyOpticsMaterials scienceThermalPhotothermal spectroscopyThermal conductivityLens (geology)Optical pathAttenuation coefficientOptoelectronicsNanotechnologyComposite materialPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, we present a short review of the recent development of the theoretical models for top-hat cw laser induced spectroscopies of thermal lens and thermal mirror. With the same probe and top-hat excitation lasers, an apparatus is set up to concurrently measure both thermal lens and thermal mirror effects of transparent samples. With the theoretical models and the experimental apparatus, not only optical and thermal properties are measured, but also the fluorescence quantum coefficient and the temperature coefficient of the optical path length of a fluorescent sample are simultaneously determined with no need of any reference sample. Mechanical properties also could be measured. Opaque samples are also studied using top-hat cw laser thermal mirror and top-hat photothermal deflection techniques to determine thermal properties (e.g., thermal conductivity and unit volume specific heat). This work shows that the combined top-hat cw laser photothermal techniques are useful for nondestructive evaluation of both transparent and opaque samples with a less expensive non-TEM 00 Gaussian laser.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicThermography and Photoacoustic TechniquesFrench-language works237,207