MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2482568171 · doi:10.31399/asm.hb.v23.a0005680

Microjoining in Medical Components and Devices

2012· book-chapter· en· W2482568171 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueASM International eBooks · 2012
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrical Contact Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical deviceWeldingKey (lock)ForcepsLaser beam weldingComputer scienceEngineering drawingMaterials scienceMechanical engineeringEngineeringBiomedical engineeringMedicineSurgeryComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Microjoining methods are commonly used to fabricate medical components and devices. This article describes key challenges involved during microjoining of medical device components. The primary mechanisms used in microjoining for medical device applications include microresistance spot welding (MRSW) and laser welding. The article illustrates the fundamental principles involved in MRSW and laser welding. The article presents examples of various microjoining methods used in medical device applications, including pacemaker and nitinol microscopic forceps.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score0.634

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.211 · 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