Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 396

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Critical assessment of thermal models for laser sputtering at high fluences

Miotello, Antonio, Kelly, Roger·1995·Applied Physics Letters

Abstract

A critical assessment of thermal models for laser sputtering at high fluences is presented. It is argued that the model explaining such sputtering by involving a subsurface superheating effect misinterprets the meaning of ‘‘vaporization’’ and ‘‘boiling’’. As a result inappropriate boundary conditions are used, including those for both the surface temperature and for the surface temperature gradient. On the contrary, it is shown that explosive boiling (also termed phase explosion) in the sense pioneered by Martynyuk and by Fucke and Seydel remains the only thermal mechanism able to explain laser sputtering at high fluences.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1063/1.114912

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 396

Metadata

Authors
Miotello, A., & Kelly, R.
Venue
Applied Physics Letters
Published
1995-12-11
Volume
67
Issue
24
Pages
3535-3537
ISSN
  • 0003-6951 (ISSN-L)
  • 1077-3118
OpenAlex
W2044666460
Cited by
396
References
0
FWCI
12.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Critical assessment of thermal models for laser sputtering at high fluences. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1063/1.114912
The paper
Miotello, A., & Kelly, R. (1995). Critical assessment of thermal models for laser sputtering at high fluences. Applied Physics Letters. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.114912

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.