MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033799350 · doi:10.1088/0026-1394/42/3/s13

Optical frequency standards

2005· article· en· W2033799350 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueMetrologia · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Frequency and Time Standards
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies
KeywordsLaser coolingReproducibilityFrequency standardIonAtomic clockAtom opticsMaterials scienceMicrowaveUltracold atomAtom (system on chip)TrappingAtomic physicsLaserOpticsPhysicsTelecommunicationsComputer scienceChemistryQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The evolution of atomic frequency standards since Essen's atomic clock fifty years ago has been considerable both in respect of microwave and optical standards. In particular, the development of trapping and laser cooling techniques for both atoms and ions has played a major role. This paper reviews the status of the development of single cold trapped ion and cold trapped atom optical frequency standards. Recent results show comb measurements of trapped ion optical frequency standards with accuracies close to Cs fountain limited operation. The factors affecting future stability and reproducibility are discussed. The opportunities for future standards capable of approaching reproducibility at the 10 −18 level are outlined, together with the likely limitations arising.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.897
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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 head0.275
Teacher spread0.268 · 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