MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2346459632 · doi:10.1117/12.2214246

Optical design and initial results from NIST's AMMT/TEMPS facility

2016· article· en· W2346459632 on OpenAlexaff
Steven Grantham, Brandon Lane, Jorge Neira, Sergey Mekhontsev, Mihaela Vlasea, Leonard M. Hanssen

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNISTComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) Physical Measurement and Engineering Laboratories are jointly developing the Additive Manufacturing Measurement Testbed (AMMT)/ Temperature and Emittance of Melts, Powders and Solids (TEMPS) facilities. These facilities will be co-located on an open architecture laser-based powder bed fusion system allowing users full access to the system's operation parameters. This will provide users with access to machine-independent monitoring and control of the powder bed fusion process. In this paper there will be emphasis on the AMMT, which incorporates in-line visible light collection optics for monitoring and feedback control of the powder bed fusion process. We shall present an overview of the AMMT/TEMPS program and its goals. The optical and mechanical design of the open architecture powder-bed fusion system and the AMMT will also be described. In addition, preliminary measurement results from the system along with the current status of the system will be described.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207