MétaCan
Menu
Cohort builder

4,299,418 works, Canadian by any of four routes.

Every filter state is a URL; the URL is the query; the query is citable via /q/⟨hash⟩. The page, the API and the export parse the same parameters.

The current cohort, streamed from the database: every work column, the machine labels, the provisional scores, and the per-row validation status. Exports are capped at 100,000 rows. Mints a permanent /q/ link for this exact query. The same filters always produce the same link, whoever asks.

Search term
Author
Year range
Sort
Language
Type
Field
Venue
Topic
Optical Systems and Laser Technology
Retraction
Abstract
Evidence source
Study design
Label agreement
Label status

Direct Codex and Gemma labels are unvalidated and sparse. Distilled predictions cover the full frame and are also unvalidated. Choose the evidence source explicitly; absence of a direct label is never a negative label.

affaffiliation
fundfunder
venuejournal
aboutaboutness

The four routes compose: require the funder route and exclude affiliation to get the funder-only stratum no affiliation-based frame ever sees.

133 results · 1 filter active ·
Results by year
20002025
Publication date
Categories
Machine labels · sparse coverage
Evidence
Language
Type
Citations
An unlabeled work is unknown, not a negative. Label coverage is reported on every query.
133 works in the cohort · of 4,299,418page 1 of 3

Labels cover 0 of 133 works in this cohort. The rest are unlabeled, which is not a negative label: the label table is sparse today and grows as labeling rounds land.

Distilled predictions cover 133 of 133 works in this cohort. Predictions are machine_predicted_unvalidated. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work (title-only); the Codex side is a distilled, calibrated classifier. Candidate is the union; consensus is the intersection.

affno abstractunlabeled
2014 Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics (CLEO 2014)
Dylan H. Mahler, Lee A. Rozema, Kent Bonsma-Fisher, L. Vermeyden, K. J. Resch, Boris Braverman +2 more
2015· article· en· arXiv (Cornell University)· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
124
citations
aboutno affunlabeled
Wide‐angle AVO
Graham Roberts
2000· article· en· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
21
citations
affno abstractunlabeled
Advances in Optical Science and Engineering
Indrani Bhattacharya, Satyajit Chakrabarti, H.S. Reehal, Vasudevan Lakshminarayanan
2017· book· en· Springer proceedings in physics· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
18
citations
affunlabeled
Efficient spherical-wave AVO modeling
Charles P. Ursenbach, Arnim B. Haase, Jonathan E. Downton
2007· article· en· The Leading Edge· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
16
citations
affunlabeled
1280 x 960 pixel microscanned infrared imaging module
Loïc Le Noc, Bruno Tremblay, Anne Martel, C. Chevalier, Nathalie Blanchard, Martin Morissette +10 more
2010· article· en· Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
7
citations
aboutno affunlabeled
Latest AO simulation results for the E-ELT
Miska Le Louarn, Pierre-Yves Madec, Sylvain Oberti, J. Paufique, M. Sarazin, Stefan Stroebele +1 more
2017· article· en· Proceedings of the Adaptive Optics for Extremely Large Telescopes 5· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
2
citations
affunlabeled
Rethinking operational VGOS observations
Matthias Schartner, Bill Petrachenko, P. Charlot, Minghui Xu, A. Collioud, Hana Krásná +1 more
2024· preprint· en· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
1
citations

How this was built: Screen · Findings · About