MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4221136189 · doi:10.1007/s00340-022-07769-z

Laser-induced incandescence for non-soot nanoparticles: recent trends and current challenges

2022· article· en· W4221136189 on OpenAlexafffund
Timothy A. Sipkens, Jan Menser, Thomas Dreier, Christof Schulz, Gregory J. Smallwood, Kyle J. Daun

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics B · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser-Ablation Synthesis of Nanoparticles
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooNational Research Council CanadaMétis National Council
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversität Duisburg-EssenDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsIncandescenceSootMaterials scienceQuantum opticsCurrent (fluid)LaserNanoparticleOpticsNanotechnologyOptoelectronicsCombustionPhysicsThermodynamicsPhysical chemistryChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Laser-induced incandescence (LII) is a widely used combustion diagnostic for in situ measurements of soot primary particle sizes and volume fractions in flames, exhaust gases, and the atmosphere. Increasingly, however, it is applied to characterize engineered nanomaterials, driven by the increasing industrial relevance of these materials and the fundamental scientific insights that may be obtained from these measurements. This review describes the state of the art as well as open research challenges and new opportunities that arise from LII measurements on non-soot nanoparticles. An overview of the basic LII model, along with statistical techniques for inferring quantities-of-interest and associated uncertainties is provided, with a review of the application of LII to various classes of materials, including elemental particles, oxide and nitride materials, and non-soot carbonaceous materials, and core-shell particles. The paper concludes with a discussion of combined and complementary diagnostics, and an outlook of future research.

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)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations40
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physics BSame topicLaser-Ablation Synthesis of NanoparticlesFrench-language works237,207