MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4404709911 · doi:10.2351/7.0001451

High average power lasers in university settings

2023· article· en· W4404709911 on OpenAlexaffabout
Gustavo Moriena, Sandu Sonoc

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser Design and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLaserPower (physics)Computer scienceEngineering physicsOptoelectronicsMaterials scienceOpticsEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High average power lasers, hundreds of watts to kilowatts, are common in industrial environments where the beams are used to cut, weld, or engrave high melting point materials such as metals. In the research environment high peak power lasers, from gigawatts to terawatts, are common for pulsed lasers (ns, ps and fs) used in ablation and ultrafast spectroscopy. However, due to the low pulse repetition frequencies, those lasers normally have intermediate average powers in the order of a few watts. In the last few years, groups at the University of Toronto have started requiring high-average power lasers for their projects. These lasers’ powers range from a few hundred watts to one kilowatt. Normally these types of lasers are completely enclosed and certified as “class I working environment” by the laser's manufacturer, but the particular needs of some projects they are used on require open beam lasers. In this paper, we'll focus on two lasers, one used for welding in a machine shop environment and the other in a research group developing a novel metal 3D printer. We will discuss the challenges of controlling different types of hazards, such as high-power beams, respiratory hazards connected to metal powder, Oxygen displacement by inert gases, etc. Changes in the laser safety training designed for the operators (craftspeople), who don't have much experience working with lasers and have little knowledge about physics will be also presented.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.184

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0550.018

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.172
Teacher spread0.166 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLaser Design and Applications→French-language works237,207→