MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964047041 · doi:10.1177/004051750307300206

Modeling the Influence of Dye Distribution on the Perceived Color Depth of a Filament Array

2003· article· en· W1964047041 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueTextile Research Journal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicColor Science and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsProtein filamentOpticsReflection (computer programming)RefractionMaterials scienceAbsorption (acoustics)Ring (chemistry)ReflectivityLayer (electronics)Work (physics)PhysicsChemistryComposite materialComputer scienceThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a model of the reflection, refraction, and absorption of light rays by a dyed cylindrical filament according to classical laws of optics. Overall light transmit tance and reflectance of a single filament are then assumed to apply to a complete layer of such filaments. The optical behavior of the entire filament array is derived by adding successive filament layers with the same or different amounts and distributions of dye. Each filament contains a light-absorbing dye that may be evenly distributed throughout it, or located in a ring close to the filament periphery (ring dyed). The model also considers the case where only filaments near the surface of the array are colored, while those in the interior are not. The calculations predict how the various different distributions of the dye in the filament array influence the perceived color depth. The results are discussed in relation to previous work and to practical dyeing experience.

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.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.177
Threshold uncertainty score0.388

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.302 · 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