MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407792412 · doi:10.1126/science.ado8554

Magnetic modulation of keyhole instability during laser welding and additive manufacturing

2025· article· en· W4407792412 on OpenAlexaff
Xianqiang Fan, Tristan G. Fleming, Samuel J. Clark, Kamel Fezzaa, Anna C. M. Getley, Sebastian Marussi, Hongze Wang, Chu Lun Alex Leung, Andrew Kao, Peter Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueScience · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and Processes
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
KeywordsKeyholeWeldingInstabilityModulation (music)LaserMaterials scienceOpticsMetallurgyMechanicsPhysicsAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Keyhole instability during laser welding and laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) can cause keyhole collapse and pore formation. Using high-speed x-ray imaging, we demonstrate that the flow vortex-induced protrusion on the rear keyhole wall is crucial in initiating keyhole instability. Applying a transverse magnetic field suppresses the keyhole instability by driving a secondary thermoelectric magnetohydrodynamics (TEMHD) flow that alters the net flow vortex. This minimizes protrusions and large-amplitude keyhole oscillations. The suppression effectiveness depends on the laser scanning direction relative to the magnetic field orientation because this controls the Seebeck effect-induced Lorentz force's direction. We show that at LPBF length scales, electromagnetic damping is weak, and for alloys with a large Seebeck coefficient, TEMHD becomes the dominant mechanism controlling flow behind the keyhole.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations68
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScienceSame topicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and ProcessesFrench-language works237,207