MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029442701 · doi:10.1364/josaa.23.001908

Laser backscattered from partially convex targets of large sizes in random media for E-wave polarization

2006· article· en· W2029442701 on OpenAlexaff
Hosam El‐Ocla

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Optical Society of America A · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRandom lasers and scattering media
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpticsPlane wavePolarization (electrochemistry)PhysicsBeam diameterRadarWavelengthM squaredBeam (structure)Radar cross-sectionRadial polarizationCross-polarized wave generationLaserLaser beam qualityLaser beamsScatteringComputer scienceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The characteristics of a radar cross section (RCS) of partially convex targets with large sizes up to five wavelengths in free space and random media are studied. The nature of the incident wave is an important factor in remote sensing and radar detection applications. I investigate the effects of beam wave incidence on the performance of RCS, drawing on the method I used in a previous study on plane-wave incidence. A beam wave can be considered a plane wave if the target size is smaller than the beam width. Therefore, to have a beam wave with a limited spot on the target, the target size should be larger than the beam width (assuming E-wave incidence wave polarization. The effects of the target configuration, random medium parameters, and the beam width on the laser RCS and the enhancement in the radar cross section are numerically analyzed, resulting in the possibility of having some sort of control over radar detection using beam wave incidence.

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations13
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Optical Society of America ASame topicRandom lasers and scattering mediaFrench-language works237,207