MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406900980 · doi:10.1117/12.3048947

Three-dimensional femtosecond laser beam shaping by real-time training and inference of a physics informed machine learning model

2025· article· en· W4406900980 on OpenAlexaff
Ziyong Yao, Pok Man Chow, Stephen Ho, Peter R. Herman

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser Material Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFemtosecondLaser beamsInferenceLaserBeam (structure)Computer sciencePhysicsArtificial intelligenceOpticsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A physics-informed machine learning (PIML) model has been trained and optimized for three-dimensional (3D) shaping of a focused ultrafast laser, with the incorporation of physical optics into model training under a 3F optical system. This PIML model enables an unprecedented range of tailoring in the 3D structural design of refractive index elements used in the fabrication of diffractive optics. The PIML model has been trained with physical optics-simulated data based on various orthonormal bases, such as Bessel and generalized Bessel beams. The objective here is to transfer the learning of the PIML model to correct 3D beam profiles at the focus, by training the PIML model with real-time experimental data captured with a 3D beam profiling and analysis system. The results of training with Bessel and generalized Bessel beams are presented for a 3F optical beam system. The resultant PIML model provided rapid, accurate, and real-time predictions for generating arbitrary 3D beam shapes in the lab, a capability otherwise impossible with traditional phase retrieval algorithms.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.565
Threshold uncertainty score0.612

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLaser Material Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207