MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982710651 · doi:10.1117/12.619306

High accuracy, absolute, cryogenic refractive index measurements of infrared lens materials for JWST NIRCam using CHARMS

2005· article· en· W1982710651 on OpenAlexaff
Douglas B. Leviton, Bradley J. Frey, Todd Kvamme

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCalibration and Measurement Techniques
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJames Webb Space TelescopeRefractive indexOpticsInfraredLens (geology)Materials sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The refractive optical design of the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) Near Infrared Camera (NIRCam) uses three infrared materials in its lenses: LiF, BaF2, and ZnSe. In order to provide the instrument's optical designers with accurate, heretofore unavailable data for absolute refractive index based on actual cryogenic measurements, two prismatic samples of each material were measured using the cryogenic, high accuracy, refraction measuring system (CHARMS) at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), densely covering the temperature range from 15 to 320 K and wavelength range from 0.4 to 5.6 microns. Data reduction methods are discussed and graphical and tabulated data for absolute refractive index, dispersion, and thermo-optic coefficient for these three materials are presented for selected wavelengths and temperatures along with estimates of index uncertainty. Coefficients for temperature-dependent Sellmeier fits of measured index are also presented with an example of their usage to predict absolute index at any wavelength or temperature within the applicable range of those parameters.

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)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations31
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicCalibration and Measurement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207