MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985426692 · doi:10.1063/1.4705734

Complementary cellophane optic gate and its use for a 3D iPad without glasses

2012· article· en· W1985426692 on OpenAlexaff
K. Iizuka

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Scientific Instruments · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Optical Imaging Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCellophaneBirefringenceMaterials scienceOpticsExtinction ratioWavelengthOptoelectronicsComposite materialPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A complementary cellophane optic gate was fabricated using a birefringent cellophane sheet. Previous versions of the optic gate required the retardance of the cellophane to be as close to 180° as possible throughout the entire visible wavelength range, which meant it was often difficult to find a cellophane sheet with the right thickness and dispersion characteristics to meet this requirement. The complementary optic gate reported in this paper has no restriction on the thickness, composition, or wavelength range of the cellophane sheet except that the cellophane must have some birefringence. Even with an arbitrary retardance, an extinction ratio of 5 × 10(-3) was achieved at λ = 0.63 μm. The optic gate was used to convert an iPad into a 3D display without the need for the observer to wear glasses. The high extinction ratio of the optic gate resulted in a 3D display of supreme quality.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Scientific InstrumentsSame topicAdvanced Optical Imaging TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207