MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986332638 · doi:10.1364/ao.49.00g136

Statistical error of a compact high-resolution Shack–Hartmann wavefront sensor with a discrete detector array

2010· article· en· W1986332638 on OpenAlexaff
Andre Fleck, Vasudevan Lakshminarayanan

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Optics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpticsPhysicsWavefrontDetectorWavefront sensorPosition (finance)Noise (video)Aperture (computer memory)Angular resolution (graph drawing)Adaptive opticsSIGNAL (programming language)Standard deviationSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Computer scienceMathematicsAcousticsComputer visionStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The noise characteristics of a compact high-resolution Shack–Hartmann wavefront sensor with an extended pupil to sensor distance have been measured. The standard deviation, σ, of the angular position error caused by random noise conforms to theoretical predictions of discrete detector arrays described by σtot=λ/D(ω/SNR+η/Vs), where ω is the position error constant, SNR is the signal-to-noise ratio, η is the geometric aperture constant, and Vs is the sum of the signal’s total counts. The agreement both confirms the theoretical derivation of this useful formula and shows that measurement of ocular aberrations under laboratory conditions at working distances greater than 30 cm introduces negligible additional error.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied OpticsSame topicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment StudiesFrench-language works237,207