MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001352983 · doi:10.1364/ao.45.001169

Control of reflection at an optical interface in the absence of total internal reflection for a retroreflective display application

2006· article· en· W2001352983 on OpenAlexaff
Anne H. Webster, Michele Mossman, Lorne Whitehead

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Optics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSurface Roughness and Optical Measurements
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRetroreflectorTotal internal reflectionOpticsReflection (computer programming)Fresnel equationsInterference (communication)Light reflectionMaterials scienceAttenuationLight intensityModulation (music)Evanescent wavePhysicsRefractive indexLaserChannel (broadcasting)Computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reflection at an interface between two materials can be modulated by means of varying the optical properties at the interface. We have studied this modulation of the reflected light with an aim to develop a flashing retroreflector for roadside conspicuity applications. Reflectance modulation has previously been studied under the conditions of total internal reflection (TIR), where a light-absorbing material placed in the associated evanescent wave region can be used to attenuate the intensity of the reflected light. If instead the light rays strike the interface at an angle that is slightly smaller than the critical angle required for TIR, they instead undergo a substantial, but partial, reflection. We have demonstrated that an analogous attenuation effect to the TIR situation is observed, even though there is no evanescent wave present under these circumstances. We have studied this behavior and have developed a model to describe the motion of the absorbing material and the related interference effects that occur.

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)0.001
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 score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied OpticsSame topicSurface Roughness and Optical MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207