MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010439116 · doi:10.1117/12.567086

Optical fiber characterization for optimization of a Brillouin-scattering-based fiber optic sensor

2004· article· en· W2010439116 on OpenAlexaff
Kellie Brown, Anthony W. Brown, Bruce G. Colpitts

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Fiber Optic Sensors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrillouin scatteringBrillouin zoneMaterials scienceOptical fiberLaser linewidthOpticsFiber optic sensorDistributed acoustic sensingFiberOptoelectronicsComposite materialPhysicsLaser

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Brillouin scattering-based distributed fiber optic sensors have been shown to be effective diagnostic tools for monitoring structural health, and detecting fires and hot spots, among other uses. Current research has mainly been focused on improving the spatial, strain and temperature resolutions, and sensing lengths of these systems, generally by the use of better signal processing and improved equipment. In contrast, there has been little published work on optimizing the sensing optical fiber itself. A number of commercially available optical fibers have been measured in order to determine how to optimize their Brillouin characteristics. Some characteristics chosen are the number of Brillouin peaks, the frequency of the peaks, their linewidth, and the temperature and strain coefficients of each peak. It is shown that lowering the intrinsic Brillouin frequency of the fiber can increase the Brillouin strain coefficient and decrease the temperature coefficient of the optical fiber for the main Brillouin peak, among other results.

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)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.208 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicAdvanced Fiber Optic SensorsFrench-language works237,207