MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034649069 · doi:10.1117/12.886008

Reduction of measurement time in BOTDA sensors using wavelet shrinkage

2011· article· en· W2034649069 on OpenAlexaff
Mohsen Farahani, Bruce G. Colpitts, Eduardo Castillo-Guerra

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Fiber Optic Sensors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShrinkageTime domainWaveletWaveformMaterials scienceBrillouin zoneNoise reductionNoise (video)Wavelet transformComputer scienceAcousticsArtificial intelligenceComputer visionOpticsPhysicsTelecommunicationsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new method based on wavelet shrinkage is presented showing decreased measurement time for Brillouin optical timedomain analysis (BOTDA) sensors. In BOTDA sensors the data acquired from measurements is contaminated with multiple sources of noise requiring enhancement in order to extract the Brillouin gain spectrum (BGS) and find strain and temperature. Conventional BOTDA sensors have used the very slow ensemble averaging technique which requires hundreds of acquisitions of each time-domain waveform. In this paper, we enhance time-domain waveforms using wavelet shrinkage before applying the ensemble averaging on them. This modification yields a significant reduction of 95% in the number of waveform acquisitions. Experimental results confirm the accuracy of the measurement based on wavelet shrinkage and show that the proposed sensor has one of the shortest measurement times amongst BOTDA sensors.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations3
Published2011
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