Investigating crater formation in nanosecond laser ablation of aluminum foils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A nanosecond Nd:YAG laser was used to study the laser ablation of aluminum foil in the phase explosion regime at a laser intensity range of 0.63–3.61 ×1012W/cm2. Laser ablation and plasma characteristics were studied using microscopic ablation crater images, plasma emission spectra, and plasma plume images. Measured plasma density using a Stark width of Al I (396.2 nm) showed a strong linear correlation with crater size, with a Pearson correlation coefficient (r) of 0.97. To understand the origin of this linear correlation, plasma temperature was estimated using Bremsstrahlung emission from 512 to 700 nm. The estimated plasma temperature and aspect ratio of the plasma plume were negatively correlated, having r=−0.76. This negative correlation resulted from a laser-plasma interaction, which heated the plasma and increased its hydrodynamic length. The percentages of laser energy used for plasma heating (Ep/EL) and Al foil ablation (EAl/EL) were estimated from plasma temperature. Increased EAl/EL, such as crater size, with increasing laser intensity, confirms that greater mass ablation is the fundamental reason for the strong linear correlation between crater size and plasma density.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".