MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993608118 · doi:10.1117/12.417362

Industrial site particulate pollution monitoring with an eye-safe and scanning industrial fiber lidar

2001· article· en· W1993608118 on OpenAlexaff
Brigitte Bélanger, André Fougères, Mario Talbot

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsInstitut National d'Optique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLidarOptical fiberEnvironmental scienceLaserMaterials scienceRemote sensingFiberOpticsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

12 Over the past few years, INO has developed an Industrial Fiber Lidar (IFL). It enables the particulate pollution monitoring on industrial sites. More particularly, it has been used to take measurements of particulate concentration at Port Facilities of an aluminum plant during boat unloading. It is an eye-safe and portable lidar. It uses a fiber laser also developed at INO emitting 1.7 microJoules at 1534 nm with a pulse repetition frequency of 5 kHz. Given the harsh environment of an industrial site, all the sensitive equipment like the laser source, detector, computer and acquisition electronics are located in a building and connected to the optical module, placed outside, via optical fibers up to 500 m long. The fiber link also offers all the flexibility for placing the optical module at a proper location. The optical module is mounted on a two axis scanning platform, able to perform an azimuth scan of 0 to 355 deg and an elevation scan of +/- 90 deg, which enables the scanning of zones defined by the user. On this industrial site, materials like bauxite, alumina, spathfluor and calcined coke having mass extinction coefficients ranging from 0.53 to 2.7 m<SUP>2</SUP>/g can be detected. Data for different measurement configurations have been obtained. Concentration values have been calculated for measurements in a hopper, along a wharf and over the urban area close to the port facilities. The lidar measurements have been compared to high volume samplers. Based on these comparisons, it has been established that the IFL is able to monitor the relative fluctuations of dust concentrations. It can be integrated to the process control of the industrial site for alarm generation when concentrations are above threshold.

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 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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.883

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicWater Quality Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207