MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996428180 · doi:10.2971/jeos.2010.10021

Application of the method of auxiliary sources to a defect-detection inverse problem of optical diffraction microscopy

2010· article· en· W1996428180 on OpenAlexaff
Mirza Karamehmedović, Mads Hoy Sørensen, Poul‐Erik Hansen, Andrei V. Lavrinenko

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the European Optical Society Rapid Publications · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersDanish Agency for Science and Higher EducationForsknings- og InnovationsstyrelsenUniversität Bremen
KeywordsDiffractionMicroscopyOpticsInverseInverse problemOptical microscopePhysicsComputer scienceMaterials scienceMathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a method of numerical solution of a type of inverse scattering problem that arises in the optical characterisation/quality control of nanostructures. The underlying global, ill-posed, nonlinear optimisation problem is first localised by best-fit matching of library and measured diffraction efficiency patterns. The inverse problem is then solved using piecewise linear interpolation between the best far-field matches. Finally, the results are refined, on average, by solving an additional local optimisation problem formulated in terms of the method of auxiliary sources. To illustrate the proposed method, we apply it in a concrete quantitative characterisation of a non-periodic, nano-scale grating defect, with numerically simulated measurements. It is shown that the presented procedure can solve the inverse problem with an accuracy usually thought to require rigorous electromagnetic theories.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.514
Threshold uncertainty score0.300

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations11
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the European Optical Society Rapid PublicationsSame topicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic ImagingFrench-language works237,207