MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037686119 · doi:10.1117/12.2015627

Diffraction limit investigation with sub-wavelength pixels

2013· article· en· W2037686119 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrared Target Detection Methodologies
Canadian institutionsInstitut National d'Optique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPixelDiffractionOpticsTerahertz radiationWavelengthDot pitchCardinal pointPhysicsLarge formatInfraredOptoelectronicsMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current state-of-the-art pixel dimensions for both visible and long-wave infrared (LWIR) imagers are approaching the wavelength of measurement. It is expected that technological advances will continue and that sub-wavelength pixels for these wavebands will become a reality. In light of the diffraction limit, scientists and engineers in the visible and infrared domains have now begun pose the question as to whether it is worth having a focal plane array (FPA) with pixel dimensions smaller than the imaging wavelength. Meanwhile, in the terahertz domain, FPAs have already been fabricated and cameras designed around them with sub-wavelength pixels. INO has developed THz cameras with 160x120 pixels with pixel pitch of 52 μm and with 388 x 284 pixels with pixel pitch of 35 μm. The THz wavelength range is from 40 μm to 1000 μm and thus the focal plane array has pixel dimensions below that of the imaging wavelength. This paper discusses experimental results of diffraction limit investigation using sub-wavelength pixel THz cameras.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.407
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.201 · 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