MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2896318810 · doi:10.2351/1.5059960

Chromatic analysis of optical emissions from laser welding

2001· article· en· W2896318810 on OpenAlexaff
Robert Mueller

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWelding Techniques and Residual Stresses
Canadian institutionsCentre for Family Medicine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChromatic scaleWeldingLaserOpticsMaterials sciencePhysicsMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a real time laser weld monitoring system based on detection of laser weld optical emissions in the UV, visible and IR wavelength ranges. These three signals are examined using chromatic analysis, and threshold tests are applied to various chromatic parameters to identify unacceptable weld quality. Classical chromatic analysis is the quantitative description of a color in terms of the amounts of “primary” colors that must be mixed to produce the desired color. For laser welding analysis, we extend this concept to consider UV, visible, and near IR wavelengths. The weld “color” is determined by the proportion of UV, visible, and IR light observed in the weld emission. Trichromatic coordinates can be defined as follows: X = IR/(UV + Visible + IR),Y = Visible/(UV + Visible + IR),Z = UV/(UV + Visible + IR) Any two of these values can be used to quantify the “color” of the weld. By plotting, for example, X versus Y as the weld proceeds with time, any changes in weld “color” may be observed. A stable welding process produces near constant trichromatic values. Any significant change (transient or long term) in the trichromatic coordinates indicates an anomaly in the weld.

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)0.001
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations2
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWelding Techniques and Residual StressesFrench-language works237,207