MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038871678 · doi:10.1117/12.2054415

Strategies to cope with sodium layer profile variations in laser guide star AO systems

2014· article· en· W2038871678 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Brent L. Ellerbroek

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdaptive optics and wavefront sensing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationBritish Columbia Knowledge Development FundNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Astronomical Observatory of JapanAssociation of Canadian Universities for Research in AstronomyCalifornia Institute of TechnologyGordon and Betty Moore FoundationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsTilt (camera)DeconvolutionPixelComputer scienceLaser guide starOpticsLaserAdaptive opticsTelescopeFrame (networking)Remote sensingGuide starLidarAlgorithmComputer visionGeologyPhysicsMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The vertical profile of the mesospheric sodium layer varies significantly on a time scale of one minute. These variations can impact the random and systematic measurement errors of laser guide star Shack-Hartmann wave front sensors, particularly on extremely large telescopes. Sensor performance can be improved by selecting pixel processing weights matched to the sodium layer profile, assuming that the shape of the profile can be measured or estimated in real time. In this paper we describe the magnitude of these effects for the Thirty Meter Telescope AO system NFIRAOS. We review several existing approaches for measuring or estimating the sodium layer profile in real time. We then describe a new method for estimating the profile directly from the laser guide star wave front pixel intensities themselves, jointly with the subaperture tip/tilt measurements. The algorithm used for this purpose is based upon the multi-frame iterative blind deconvolution algorithm from image post processing: Subaperture tip/tilts and the sodium profile are estimated successively, bootstrapping the estimate of each quantity from the previous estimate of the other. We present promising initial simulation results on the potential performance of the algorithm, and suggest areas for future work.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.901
Threshold uncertainty score0.878

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicAdaptive optics and wavefront sensingFrench-language works237,207