MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4372285931 · doi:10.3390/jmmp7030089

Ultrafast Laser Additive Manufacturing: A Review

2023· review· en· W4372285931 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Manufacturing and Materials Processing · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser Material Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsUltrashort pulseLaserSelective laser sinteringNanotechnologyLithographyMaterials scienceProcess (computing)Computer scienceManufacturing engineeringEngineeringOptoelectronicsOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ultrafast lasers are proven and continually evolving manufacturing tools. Concurrently, additive manufacturing (AM) has emerged as a key area of interest for 3D fabrication of objects with arbitrary geometries. Use of ultrafast lasers for AM presents possibilities for next generation manufacturing techniques for hard-to-process materials, transparent materials, and micro- and nano-manufacturing. Of particular interest are selective laser melting/sintering (SLM/SLS), multiphoton lithography (MPL), laser-induced forward transfer (LIFT), pulsed laser deposition (PLD), and welding. The development, applications, and recent advancements of these technologies are described in this review as an overview and delineation of the burgeoning ultrafast laser AM field. As they mature, their adoption by industry and incorporation into commercial systems will be facilitated by process advancements such as: process monitoring and control, increased throughput, and their integration into hybrid manufacturing systems. Recent progress regarding these aspects is also reviewed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.725
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.264 · 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