MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4286717424 · doi:10.4028/p-g1d558

Imprinting of Micro-/Nano-Textures onto Metals and Alloys with Use of the Laser-Printed DLC-Die

2022· article· en· W4286717424 on OpenAlexaff
Tatsuhiko Aizawa, Tadahiko Inohara

Bibliographic record

VenueKey engineering materials · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNanofabrication and Lithography Techniques
Canadian institutionsCentre For Cold Ocean Resources Engineering
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceProfilometerEmbossingNano-EmblemOpticsComposite materialSurface finish

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper focused a two-step procedure to imprint the tailored emblems, patterns, symbols and codes onto the metallic and polymer product surfaces. The laser printing was first used to form these tailored micro-/nano-textures onto a Diamond-Like Carbon (DLC) coating die. The DLC film with the thickness of 20 mm and the hardness of 22 GPa was utilized as a mother die. Femtosecond laser printing was used to shape the tailored micro-/nano-textures on this die. Seven emblems such as a star-patterned texture with the maximum depth of 4 mm were just cut into the DLC-die to have color-grating by micro-texturing and surface plasmonic brilliance by nanotexturing. In second, Computer Numerical Control (CNC) – stamping was used to imprint these textures onto the aluminum alloy plate with the thickness of 1 mm. Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) and three dimensional profilometer were used to investigate the geometric accuracy in this two-step printing procedure. The constituent micro-/nano-textures of each emblem was accurately imprinted onto the aluminum work. The optical properties were also duplicated together with this geometric imprinting.

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)0.000
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
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.173 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKey engineering materialsSame topicNanofabrication and Lithography TechniquesFrench-language works237,207