MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413213450 · doi:10.1016/j.isci.2025.113333

Improved positioning criterion and imaging scheme of deep UV planar laser-induced fluorescence technology

2025· article· en· W4413213450 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Hongchun Wu, Shutao Dai, Zhi Zhang, Haizhou Huang, WU Li-xia, Wenxiong Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueiScience · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser Design and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChina Aerodynamics Research and Development CenterChinese Academy of SciencesCanadian Anesthesiologists' Society
KeywordsFluorescencePlanarLaserFluorescence-lifetime imaging microscopyOpticsScheme (mathematics)NanotechnologyMaterials scienceOptoelectronicsComputer sciencePhysicsComputer graphics (images)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In summary, we have developed a physical model to describe the evolution of the nitric oxide-based planar laser-induced fluorescence technology (NO-PLIF) signal in a high-enthalpy wind tunnel and analyzed the factors that affect the contrast of fluorescent stripes obtained from two successive ultraviolet (UV) laser exposures. Based on this, we improved the flow velocity calculation algorithm with a centroiding positioning criterion, which is more accurate for flows with velocities of above 3 km/s and has better adaptability to background noises compared to the conventional peak value positioning criterion. Meanwhile, we have identified that a shortened frame interval is an effective means to improve the measurement accuracy of a hypervelocity flow, where a dual-frame high-speed UV imaging system is developed with a frame interval that is two orders of magnitude shorter than existing UV cameras. Consequently, transient N 2 flows with velocities ranging from 3.2 to 5.2 km/s were successfully measured. Further efforts will pay on extending the proposed positioning criterion to the cross-correlation algorithm for higher velocity measurement accuracy.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.423
Threshold uncertainty score0.238

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueiScienceSame topicLaser Design and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207