MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981633415 · doi:10.1117/12.2034688

Research of application of high-repetition-rate green laser in underwater imaging system

2013· article· en· W1981633415 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tao Luo, Liying Sun, Chizhu Ding, Min Xia, Kecheng Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnderwaterRepetition (rhetorical device)Green laserLaserComputer scienceRemote sensingOpticsGeologyPhysicsOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is commonly known that absorption and scattering are the main causes of reducing performance of imaging system, especially imaging distance and resolution. Generally, various techniques are applied to decrease the effect of scattering, such as synchronous scanning and range-gated technique. Continuous-laser imaging technique meets requirements of imaging objects in the large field of view in real time, but imaging distance is less than 2 attenuation lengths in natural water. High-repetition-rate green laser, called quasi-continuous wave (QCW) green laser, is a better light source for underwater imaging. It has 1 kHz-100 kHz modulated rate, and its single pulse peak power is KW magnitude, which can be applied to range-gated imaging as Canadian LUCIE system. In addition, its polarization property is excellent for underwater polarization imaging. Therefore, it has enormous potential to underwater imaging. In order to realize its performance in underwater imaging system, we setup a separated underwater staring imaging system. For this system, a theoretic model is built by the lidar equation and optic transmission theory, and the system is evaluated by modulation transfer function (MTF). The effects of laser and receiver’s parameters for the system are analyzed. Then the comparative experiments are conducted in turbid water in laboratory. The results indicate that high pulse energy improves imaging distance. Aperture and polarization could reduce the effect of scattering effectively in staring system. The result shows that this underwater system performs better by choosing suitable parameters of source and receiver.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic ImagingFrench-language works237,207