Comparing the ISO-recommended and the cumulative data-reduction algorithms in S-on-1 laser damage test by a reverse approach method

We compare the ISO-recommended (the standard) data-reduction algorithm used to determine the surface laser-induced damage threshold of optical materials by the S-on-1 test with two newly suggested algorithms, both named “cumulative” algorithms/methods, a regular one and a limit-case one, intended to...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inReview of scientific instruments Vol. 89; no. 1; pp. 013104 - 13112
Main Authors Zorila, Alexandru, Stratan, Aurel, Nemes, George
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States American Institute of Physics 01.01.2018
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN0034-6748
1089-7623
1089-7623
DOI10.1063/1.4989930

Cover

Abstract We compare the ISO-recommended (the standard) data-reduction algorithm used to determine the surface laser-induced damage threshold of optical materials by the S-on-1 test with two newly suggested algorithms, both named “cumulative” algorithms/methods, a regular one and a limit-case one, intended to perform in some respects better than the standard one. To avoid additional errors due to real experiments, a simulated test is performed, named the reverse approach. This approach simulates the real damage experiments, by generating artificial test-data of damaged and non-damaged sites, based on an assumed, known damage threshold fluence of the target and on a given probability distribution function to induce the damage. In this work, a database of 12 sets of test-data containing both damaged and non-damaged sites was generated by using four different reverse techniques and by assuming three specific damage probability distribution functions. The same value for the threshold fluence was assumed, and a Gaussian fluence distribution on each irradiated site was considered, as usual for the S-on-1 test. Each of the test-data was independently processed by the standard and by the two cumulative data-reduction algorithms, the resulting fitted probability distributions were compared with the initially assumed probability distribution functions, and the quantities used to compare these algorithms were determined. These quantities characterize the accuracy and the precision in determining the damage threshold and the goodness of fit of the damage probability curves. The results indicate that the accuracy in determining the absolute damage threshold is best for the ISO-recommended method, the precision is best for the limit-case of the cumulative method, and the goodness of fit estimator (adjusted R-squared) is almost the same for all three algorithms.
AbstractList We compare the ISO-recommended (the standard) data-reduction algorithm used to determine the surface laser-induced damage threshold of optical materials by the S-on-1 test with two newly suggested algorithms, both named "cumulative" algorithms/methods, a regular one and a limit-case one, intended to perform in some respects better than the standard one. To avoid additional errors due to real experiments, a simulated test is performed, named the reverse approach. This approach simulates the real damage experiments, by generating artificial test-data of damaged and non-damaged sites, based on an assumed, known damage threshold fluence of the target and on a given probability distribution function to induce the damage. In this work, a database of 12 sets of test-data containing both damaged and non-damaged sites was generated by using four different reverse techniques and by assuming three specific damage probability distribution functions. The same value for the threshold fluence was assumed, and a Gaussian fluence distribution on each irradiated site was considered, as usual for the S-on-1 test. Each of the test-data was independently processed by the standard and by the two cumulative data-reduction algorithms, the resulting fitted probability distributions were compared with the initially assumed probability distribution functions, and the quantities used to compare these algorithms were determined. These quantities characterize the accuracy and the precision in determining the damage threshold and the goodness of fit of the damage probability curves. The results indicate that the accuracy in determining the absolute damage threshold is best for the ISO-recommended method, the precision is best for the limit-case of the cumulative method, and the goodness of fit estimator (adjusted R-squared) is almost the same for all three algorithms.
We compare the ISO-recommended (the standard) data-reduction algorithm used to determine the surface laser-induced damage threshold of optical materials by the S-on-1 test with two newly suggested algorithms, both named "cumulative" algorithms/methods, a regular one and a limit-case one, intended to perform in some respects better than the standard one. To avoid additional errors due to real experiments, a simulated test is performed, named the reverse approach. This approach simulates the real damage experiments, by generating artificial test-data of damaged and non-damaged sites, based on an assumed, known damage threshold fluence of the target and on a given probability distribution function to induce the damage. In this work, a database of 12 sets of test-data containing both damaged and non-damaged sites was generated by using four different reverse techniques and by assuming three specific damage probability distribution functions. The same value for the threshold fluence was assumed, and a Gaussian fluence distribution on each irradiated site was considered, as usual for the S-on-1 test. Each of the test-data was independently processed by the standard and by the two cumulative data-reduction algorithms, the resulting fitted probability distributions were compared with the initially assumed probability distribution functions, and the quantities used to compare these algorithms were determined. These quantities characterize the accuracy and the precision in determining the damage threshold and the goodness of fit of the damage probability curves. The results indicate that the accuracy in determining the absolute damage threshold is best for the ISO-recommended method, the precision is best for the limit-case of the cumulative method, and the goodness of fit estimator (adjusted R-squared) is almost the same for all three algorithms.We compare the ISO-recommended (the standard) data-reduction algorithm used to determine the surface laser-induced damage threshold of optical materials by the S-on-1 test with two newly suggested algorithms, both named "cumulative" algorithms/methods, a regular one and a limit-case one, intended to perform in some respects better than the standard one. To avoid additional errors due to real experiments, a simulated test is performed, named the reverse approach. This approach simulates the real damage experiments, by generating artificial test-data of damaged and non-damaged sites, based on an assumed, known damage threshold fluence of the target and on a given probability distribution function to induce the damage. In this work, a database of 12 sets of test-data containing both damaged and non-damaged sites was generated by using four different reverse techniques and by assuming three specific damage probability distribution functions. The same value for the threshold fluence was assumed, and a Gaussian fluence distribution on each irradiated site was considered, as usual for the S-on-1 test. Each of the test-data was independently processed by the standard and by the two cumulative data-reduction algorithms, the resulting fitted probability distributions were compared with the initially assumed probability distribution functions, and the quantities used to compare these algorithms were determined. These quantities characterize the accuracy and the precision in determining the damage threshold and the goodness of fit of the damage probability curves. The results indicate that the accuracy in determining the absolute damage threshold is best for the ISO-recommended method, the precision is best for the limit-case of the cumulative method, and the goodness of fit estimator (adjusted R-squared) is almost the same for all three algorithms.
Author Zorila, Alexandru
Stratan, Aurel
Nemes, George
Author_xml – sequence: 1
  givenname: Alexandru
  surname: Zorila
  fullname: Zorila, Alexandru
  organization: National Institute for Lasers, Plasma, and Radiation Physics
– sequence: 2
  givenname: Aurel
  surname: Stratan
  fullname: Stratan, Aurel
  organization: National Institute for Lasers, Plasma, and Radiation Physics
– sequence: 3
  givenname: George
  surname: Nemes
  fullname: Nemes, George
  organization: 2ASTiGMAT ™, 6812 Olive Tree Way, Citrus Heights, California 95610, USA
BackLink https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29390680$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed
BookMark eNp90U1r3DAQBmBREppN2kP_QBH0khacSJattY5l6UcgkEPasxhL410HS9pKciDn_vFou7uXUKKLQDwzGt45Jyc-eCTkA2dXnElxza8a1Skl2Buy4KxT1VLW4oQsGBNNJZdNd0bOU3pg5bScvyVntRKKyY4tyN9VcFuIo1_TvEF6c39XRTTBOfQWLQVv_72b2c0T5PERqYUMxdjZ5DF4CtM6xDFvXKKjp_dV8BWnEySMRTpYI82YMu2fKNCIjxgTUthuYwCzoQ7zJth35HSAKeH7w31Bfn__9mv1s7q9-3Gz-npbGaFkrgYLgFjLZW-AqVoIq6RpOymHFpnCAYXtSwpYq76GGvreDEyqegkWecuHXlyQy33f8vufuUyl3ZgMThN4DHPSvESolOp4U-inF_QhzNGX6XTNedsxyZqd-nhQc-_Q6m0cHcQnfYy3gOs9MDGkFHHQZsywyy1HGCfNmd4tUHN9WGCp-Pyi4tj0f_bL3qZj11fwM0sKqFY
CODEN RSINAK
CitedBy_id crossref_primary_10_1038_s41598_022_14974_5
Cites_doi 10.1117/12.2194303
10.1364/oe.20.011561
10.1117/12.867349
10.1016/j.optcom.2005.06.059
10.1117/1.oe.53.12.122513
10.1117/12.2029997
10.1117/1.oe.52.5.054203
10.1063/1.4932617
10.1117/12.976845
10.1364/ao.23.003796
10.1063/1.1447555
10.1117/12.228281
10.1117/12.753054
10.1117/12.976315
10.1364/ao.31.004143
10.1117/12.2194944
10.1063/1.4801955
ContentType Journal Article
Copyright Author(s)
2018 Author(s). Published by AIP Publishing.
Copyright_xml – notice: Author(s)
– notice: 2018 Author(s). Published by AIP Publishing.
DBID AAYXX
CITATION
NPM
8FD
H8D
L7M
7X8
DOI 10.1063/1.4989930
DatabaseName CrossRef
PubMed
Technology Research Database
Aerospace Database
Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitle CrossRef
PubMed
Technology Research Database
Aerospace Database
Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitleList PubMed

Technology Research Database
MEDLINE - Academic
CrossRef
Database_xml – sequence: 1
  dbid: NPM
  name: PubMed
  url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed
  sourceTypes: Index Database
DeliveryMethod fulltext_linktorsrc
Discipline Sciences (General)
EISSN 1089-7623
ExternalDocumentID 29390680
10_1063_1_4989930
rsi
Genre Journal Article
GrantInformation_xml – fundername: Unitatea Executiva pentru Finantarea Invatamantului Superior, a Cercetarii, Dezvoltarii si Inovarii
  grantid: 266/2014 - LIDOPTICS
  funderid: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100006595
GroupedDBID ---
-DZ
-~X
.DC
.GJ
0ZJ
123
186
1UP
2-P
29P
3O-
4.4
41~
53G
5RE
5VS
6TJ
85S
9M8
A9.
AAAAW
AABDS
AAEUA
AAPUP
AAYIH
AAYJJ
ABFTF
ABJNI
ACBEA
ACBRY
ACGFO
ACGFS
ACKIV
ACLYJ
ACNCT
ACZLF
ADCTM
ADIYS
ADRHT
AEGXH
AEJMO
AENEX
AETEA
AFATG
AFDAS
AFFNX
AFHCQ
AFMIJ
AGKCL
AGLKD
AGMXG
AGTJO
AHPGS
AHSDT
AIAGR
AJJCW
AJQPL
ALEPV
ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS
AQWKA
ATXIE
AWQPM
BPZLN
CS3
DU5
EBS
EJD
ESX
F20
F5P
FDOHQ
FFFMQ
HAM
L7B
M43
M6X
M71
M73
MVM
N9A
NEJ
NEUPN
NHB
NPSNA
O-B
OHT
P2P
QZG
RDFOP
RIP
RNS
ROL
RQS
TAE
TN5
UAO
UHB
VQA
WH7
XFK
XJT
XOL
XSW
YNT
YZZ
ZCG
ZXP
~02
AAGWI
AAYXX
ABJGX
ADMLS
BDMKI
CITATION
ADXHL
NPM
8FD
H8D
L7M
7X8
ID FETCH-LOGICAL-c396t-fdaaee267bca09233d96c5866f5e09efe3db899e29b2a2abbcf06927ade151fb3
ISSN 0034-6748
1089-7623
IngestDate Thu Sep 04 17:46:12 EDT 2025
Mon Jun 30 03:36:11 EDT 2025
Mon Jul 21 05:49:39 EDT 2025
Thu Apr 24 23:07:06 EDT 2025
Wed Oct 01 04:04:10 EDT 2025
Fri Jun 21 00:14:24 EDT 2024
IsPeerReviewed true
IsScholarly true
Issue 1
Language English
License 0034-6748/2018/89(1)/013104/9/$30.00
Published by AIP Publishing.
LinkModel OpenURL
MergedId FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c396t-fdaaee267bca09233d96c5866f5e09efe3db899e29b2a2abbcf06927ade151fb3
Notes ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
ORCID 0000-0001-8204-8283
0000000182048283
PMID 29390680
PQID 2115806044
PQPubID 2050675
PageCount 9
ParticipantIDs proquest_journals_2115806044
scitation_primary_10_1063_1_4989930
pubmed_primary_29390680
proquest_miscellaneous_1993999814
crossref_primary_10_1063_1_4989930
crossref_citationtrail_10_1063_1_4989930
ProviderPackageCode CITATION
AAYXX
PublicationCentury 2000
PublicationDate 20180100
2018-01-01
2018-Jan
20180101
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD 2018-01-01
PublicationDate_xml – month: 01
  year: 2018
  text: 20180100
PublicationDecade 2010
PublicationPlace United States
PublicationPlace_xml – name: United States
– name: Melville
PublicationTitle Review of scientific instruments
PublicationTitleAlternate Rev Sci Instrum
PublicationYear 2018
Publisher American Institute of Physics
Publisher_xml – name: American Institute of Physics
References Zorila, Rusen, Stratan, Nemes (c11) 2013; 52
Schrameyer, Jupe, Jensen, Ristau (c12) 2013; 8885
O’Connell (c19) 1992; 31
Batavičiutė, Grigas, Smalakys, Melninkaitis (c23) 2013; 84
Batavičiutė, Grigas, Smalakys, Melninkaitis (c24) 2012; 8530
Gamaly, Rode, Luther-Davies, Tikhonchuk (c4) 2002; 9
Stratan, Zorila, Rusen, Simion, Blanaru, Fenic, Neagu, Nemes (c9) 2012; 8530
Shore, Stuart, Feit, Rubenchik, Perry (c3) 1995; 2633
Arenberg, Riede, Ciapponi, Allenspacher, Herringer (c6) 2010; 7842
Zorila, Stratan, Dumitrache, Rusen, Nemes (c16) 2015; 9632
Jensen, Mrohs, Gyamfi, Mädebach, Ristau (c17) 2015; 9632
Porteus, Seitel (c18) 1984; 23
Laurence, Bude, Ly, Shen, Feit (c2) 2012; 20
Krol, Gallais, Grèzes-Besset, Natoli, Commandré (c1) 2005; 256
Stratan, Zorila, Rusen, Nemes (c10) 2014; 53
Arenberg (c15) 2007; 6720
Jensen, Mrohs, Gyamfi, Mädebach, Ristau (c13) 2015; 86
(2023080123322620700_c15) 2007; 6720
(2023080123322620700_c17) 2015; 9632
(2023080123322620700_c5b) 2011
(2023080123322620700_c10) 2014; 53
(2023080123322620700_c20) 2005
(2023080123322620700_c16) 2015; 9632
(2023080123322620700_c21) 2015
2023080123322620700_c14
2023080123322620700_c8
2023080123322620700_c7
(2023080123322620700_c5a) 2011
(2023080123322620700_c23) 2013; 84
(2023080123322620700_c1) 2005; 256
(2023080123322620700_c13) 2015; 86
(2023080123322620700_c11) 2013; 52
(2023080123322620700_c18) 1984; 23
(2023080123322620700_c3) 1995; 2633
(2023080123322620700_c24) 2012; 8530
(2023080123322620700_c6) 2010; 7842
(2023080123322620700_c2) 2012; 20
(2023080123322620700_c12) 2013; 8885
2023080123322620700_c22b
2023080123322620700_c28
2023080123322620700_c22a
2023080123322620700_c27
(2023080123322620700_c4) 2002; 9
2023080123322620700_c22d
2023080123322620700_c26
2023080123322620700_c22c
2023080123322620700_c25
(2023080123322620700_c19) 1992; 31
(2023080123322620700_c9) 2012; 8530
2023080123322620700_c29
References_xml – volume: 53
  start-page: 122513
  year: 2014
  ident: c10
  article-title: Measuring effective area of spots from pulsed laser beams
  publication-title: Opt. Eng.
– volume: 9632
  start-page: 96321J
  year: 2015
  ident: c17
  article-title: Lowering evaluation uncertainties in laser-induced damage testing
  publication-title: Proc. SPIE
– volume: 23
  start-page: 3796
  year: 1984
  ident: c18
  article-title: Absolute onset of optical surface damage using distributed defect ensembles
  publication-title: Appl. Opt.
– volume: 9
  start-page: 949
  year: 2002
  ident: c4
  article-title: Ablation of solids by femtosecond lasers: Ablation mechanism and ablation thresholds for metals and dielectrics
  publication-title: Phys. Plasmas
– volume: 8530
  start-page: 85301Y
  year: 2012
  ident: c9
  article-title: Automated test station for laser-induced damage threshold measurements according to ISO 21254-1,2,3,4 standards
  publication-title: Proc. SPIE
– volume: 52
  start-page: 054203
  year: 2013
  ident: c11
  article-title: Measuring the effective pulse duration of nanosecond and femtosecond laser pulses for laser-induced damage experiments
  publication-title: Opt. Eng.
– volume: 8885
  start-page: 88851J
  year: 2013
  ident: c12
  article-title: Algorithm for cumulative damage probability calculations in S-on-1 laser damage testing
  publication-title: Proc. SPIE
– volume: 256
  start-page: 184
  year: 2005
  ident: c1
  article-title: Investigation of nanoprecursors threshold distribution in laser damage testing
  publication-title: Opt. Commun.
– volume: 84
  start-page: 045108
  year: 2013
  ident: c23
  article-title: Revision of laser-induced damage threshold evaluation from damage probability data
  publication-title: Rev. Sci. Instrum.
– volume: 9632
  start-page: 96321H
  year: 2015
  ident: c16
  article-title: Analysis of cumulative versus ISO-recommended calculation of damage probability using a database of real S-on-1 tests
  publication-title: Proc. SPIE
– volume: 86
  start-page: 103106
  year: 2015
  ident: c13
  article-title: Higher certainty of the laser-induced damage threshold test with a redistributing data treatment
  publication-title: Rev. Sci. Instrum.
– volume: 8530
  start-page: 85301S
  year: 2012
  ident: c24
  article-title: Bayesian approach of laser-induced damage threshold analysis and determination of error bars
  publication-title: Proc. SPIE
– volume: 2633
  start-page: 714
  year: 1995
  ident: c3
  article-title: Laser induced damage in multilayer dielectric gratings due to ultrashort laser pulses
  publication-title: Proc. SPIE
– volume: 20
  start-page: 11561
  year: 2012
  ident: c2
  article-title: Extracting the distribution of laser damage precursors on fused silica surfaces for 351 nm, 3 ns laser pulses at high fluences (20-150 J/cm )
  publication-title: Opt. Express
– volume: 31
  start-page: 4143
  year: 1992
  ident: c19
  article-title: Onset threshold analysis of defect-driven surface and bulk laser damage
  publication-title: Appl. Opt.
– volume: 7842
  start-page: 78421B
  year: 2010
  ident: c6
  article-title: An empirical investigation of the laser survivability curve
  publication-title: Proc. SPIE
– volume: 6720
  start-page: 672011
  year: 2007
  ident: c15
  article-title: The relationship between laser fluence profile and the cumulative probability of damage curve
  publication-title: Proc. SPIE
– volume: 9632
  start-page: 96321H
  year: 2015
  ident: 2023080123322620700_c16
  article-title: Analysis of cumulative versus ISO-recommended calculation of damage probability using a database of real S-on-1 tests
  publication-title: Proc. SPIE
  doi: 10.1117/12.2194303
– volume-title: Laser and Laser-Related Equipment–Test Methods for Laser Beam Widths, Divergence Angles, and Beam Propagation Ratios
  year: 2005
  ident: 2023080123322620700_c20
– volume: 20
  start-page: 11561
  year: 2012
  ident: 2023080123322620700_c2
  article-title: Extracting the distribution of laser damage precursors on fused silica surfaces for 351 nm, 3 ns laser pulses at high fluences (20-150 J/cm2)
  publication-title: Opt. Express
  doi: 10.1364/oe.20.011561
– ident: 2023080123322620700_c28
– volume: 7842
  start-page: 78421B
  year: 2010
  ident: 2023080123322620700_c6
  article-title: An empirical investigation of the laser survivability curve
  publication-title: Proc. SPIE
  doi: 10.1117/12.867349
– volume-title: Lasers and Laser-Related Equipment–Test Methods for Laser-Induced Damage Threshold
  year: 2011
  ident: 2023080123322620700_c5a
– ident: 2023080123322620700_c22d
– ident: 2023080123322620700_c22b
– ident: 2023080123322620700_c25
– volume: 256
  start-page: 184
  year: 2005
  ident: 2023080123322620700_c1
  article-title: Investigation of nanoprecursors threshold distribution in laser damage testing
  publication-title: Opt. Commun.
  doi: 10.1016/j.optcom.2005.06.059
– ident: 2023080123322620700_c8
– volume: 53
  start-page: 122513
  year: 2014
  ident: 2023080123322620700_c10
  article-title: Measuring effective area of spots from pulsed laser beams
  publication-title: Opt. Eng.
  doi: 10.1117/1.oe.53.12.122513
– volume: 8885
  start-page: 88851J
  year: 2013
  ident: 2023080123322620700_c12
  article-title: Algorithm for cumulative damage probability calculations in S-on-1 laser damage testing
  publication-title: Proc. SPIE
  doi: 10.1117/12.2029997
– volume: 52
  start-page: 054203
  year: 2013
  ident: 2023080123322620700_c11
  article-title: Measuring the effective pulse duration of nanosecond and femtosecond laser pulses for laser-induced damage experiments
  publication-title: Opt. Eng.
  doi: 10.1117/1.oe.52.5.054203
– volume-title: Lasers and Laser-Related Equipment–Test Methods for Laser-Induced Damage Threshold
  year: 2011
  ident: 2023080123322620700_c5b
– volume: 86
  start-page: 103106
  year: 2015
  ident: 2023080123322620700_c13
  article-title: Higher certainty of the laser-induced damage threshold test with a redistributing data treatment
  publication-title: Rev. Sci. Instrum.
  doi: 10.1063/1.4932617
– ident: 2023080123322620700_c14
– volume: 8530
  start-page: 85301Y
  year: 2012
  ident: 2023080123322620700_c9
  article-title: Automated test station for laser-induced damage threshold measurements according to ISO 21254-1,2,3,4 standards
  publication-title: Proc. SPIE
  doi: 10.1117/12.976845
– volume: 23
  start-page: 3796
  year: 1984
  ident: 2023080123322620700_c18
  article-title: Absolute onset of optical surface damage using distributed defect ensembles
  publication-title: Appl. Opt.
  doi: 10.1364/ao.23.003796
– ident: 2023080123322620700_c27
– volume: 9
  start-page: 949
  year: 2002
  ident: 2023080123322620700_c4
  article-title: Ablation of solids by femtosecond lasers: Ablation mechanism and ablation thresholds for metals and dielectrics
  publication-title: Phys. Plasmas
  doi: 10.1063/1.1447555
– ident: 2023080123322620700_c29
– volume: 2633
  start-page: 714
  year: 1995
  ident: 2023080123322620700_c3
  article-title: Laser induced damage in multilayer dielectric gratings due to ultrashort laser pulses
  publication-title: Proc. SPIE
  doi: 10.1117/12.228281
– volume-title: Optics and Photonics–Lasers and Laser-Related Equipment–Test Methods for Laser Beam Power (Energy) Density Distribution
  year: 2015
  ident: 2023080123322620700_c21
– volume: 6720
  start-page: 672011
  year: 2007
  ident: 2023080123322620700_c15
  article-title: The relationship between laser fluence profile and the cumulative probability of damage curve
  publication-title: Proc. SPIE
  doi: 10.1117/12.753054
– ident: 2023080123322620700_c22c
– ident: 2023080123322620700_c26
– ident: 2023080123322620700_c22a
– volume: 8530
  start-page: 85301S
  year: 2012
  ident: 2023080123322620700_c24
  article-title: Bayesian approach of laser-induced damage threshold analysis and determination of error bars
  publication-title: Proc. SPIE
  doi: 10.1117/12.976315
– volume: 31
  start-page: 4143
  year: 1992
  ident: 2023080123322620700_c19
  article-title: Onset threshold analysis of defect-driven surface and bulk laser damage
  publication-title: Appl. Opt.
  doi: 10.1364/ao.31.004143
– volume: 9632
  start-page: 96321J
  year: 2015
  ident: 2023080123322620700_c17
  article-title: Lowering evaluation uncertainties in laser-induced damage testing
  publication-title: Proc. SPIE
  doi: 10.1117/12.2194944
– volume: 84
  start-page: 045108
  year: 2013
  ident: 2023080123322620700_c23
  article-title: Revision of laser-induced damage threshold evaluation from damage probability data
  publication-title: Rev. Sci. Instrum.
  doi: 10.1063/1.4801955
– ident: 2023080123322620700_c7
SSID ssj0000511
Score 2.2583616
Snippet We compare the ISO-recommended (the standard) data-reduction algorithm used to determine the surface laser-induced damage threshold of optical materials by the...
SourceID proquest
pubmed
crossref
scitation
SourceType Aggregation Database
Index Database
Enrichment Source
Publisher
StartPage 013104
SubjectTerms Algorithms
Computer simulation
Distribution functions
Fluence
Goodness of fit
Laser damage
Normal distribution
Optical materials
Probability distribution
Probability distribution functions
Reduction
Scientific apparatus & instruments
Title Comparing the ISO-recommended and the cumulative data-reduction algorithms in S-on-1 laser damage test by a reverse approach method
URI http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4989930
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29390680
https://www.proquest.com/docview/2115806044
https://www.proquest.com/docview/1993999814
Volume 89
hasFullText 1
inHoldings 1
isFullTextHit
isPrint
journalDatabaseRights – providerCode: PRVEBS
  databaseName: Inspec with Full Text
  customDbUrl:
  eissn: 1089-7623
  dateEnd: 20241102
  omitProxy: false
  ssIdentifier: ssj0000511
  issn: 0034-6748
  databaseCode: ADMLS
  dateStart: 19850101
  isFulltext: true
  titleUrlDefault: https://www.ebsco.com/products/research-databases/inspec-full-text
  providerName: EBSCOhost
link http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV1bb9MwFLZK9wA8IMa1MJC5CA1NHs2lTvJYjU0DdZtEW6lvkR07MKlJx5oiwev-OOfErpuyIg1eosqxasvny8l3Ts6FkLfwztJerkIW6VizUOToaMpCxqWKpMpkTynMHT455cfj8POkN2m1rhpRS4tK7me_NuaV_I9UYQzkilmy_yBZ96cwAL9BvnAFCcP1RjI-ME0EbcLTp-EZQ_u2KGq3touNzBZF3aPrh97DeFCYoxa2Qfj06-zyvPpW1EGxQzYrmbcHdBq7hosCo3mAiFbIUAXmuABT1K4Iue093SS3X1wajEmzxCgkDHavsECDLRlVO6lh0alopNdcLpyjB4vlGp9sH0s9r3zVNnHC-PCbvgovbvgqjHrtxgkD9WtUmt4wZnWyaSu0hj2jYLE8kOlXfE33A9lCN8R-mIANaT_2rNXXPj1Lj8aDQTo6nIzeXXxn2HoMP9HbPiy3yJYP--i2yVb_48lguHqh9-o2zm6jywJVPPjgVlunNddslbvkNpy8Ca5o8JfRfXLPGh60b1C0TVq6fEC2rWqf011bf_z9Q3LlYEUBPvQPWFGQVz2-ghVdhxVdwYqel9TAitawogZWFGFF5U8qqIUVXcKKGlg9IuOjw9HBMbO9OlgWJLxiuRJCa59HMhNdMBoClfCsF3Oe93Q30bkOlISD0n4ifeELKbO8yxM_EkoD58xl8Ji0y1mpnxIaZAJYVQTEMY9CDRZ15kUKaTQYg75IeIfsLo86XZ4p9lOZpnVABQ9SL7VS6ZDXbuqFqd6yadLOUl6pfbjnqQ-WUoyFpcIOeeVug-rF72mi1LPFPMXYV7CvYg_mPDFydqsAi06wrU2HvHGC__sWnt1gjefkzuqR2iFteHb1CyDElXxpAfsbebi7uQ
linkProvider EBSCOhost
openUrl ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparing+the+ISO-recommended+and+the+cumulative+data-reduction+algorithms+in+S-on-1+laser+damage+test+by+a+reverse+approach+method&rft.jtitle=Review+of+scientific+instruments&rft.au=Zorila%2C+Alexandru&rft.au=Stratan%2C+Aurel&rft.au=Nemes%2C+George&rft.date=2018-01-01&rft.issn=1089-7623&rft.eissn=1089-7623&rft.volume=89&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=013104&rft_id=info:doi/10.1063%2F1.4989930&rft.externalDBID=NO_FULL_TEXT
thumbnail_l http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=0034-6748&client=summon
thumbnail_m http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=0034-6748&client=summon
thumbnail_s http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=0034-6748&client=summon