MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Complex lens design: searching for a needle in a haystack

2012· article· en· W2045471893 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

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicChaos-based Image/Signal Encryption
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHaystackLens (geology)Computer scienceMaxima and minimaSet (abstract data type)Curse of dimensionalityThrough-the-lens meteringFunction (biology)Volume (thermodynamics)Theoretical computer scienceArtificial intelligenceMathematicsEngineeringProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Optical design of complex (multi-element) lenses is traditionally considered to be part science and part art, primarily because of the enormous complexity of the problem. Recent advances in high performance computing (HPC) made it feasible to adopt a purely scientific approach in discovering new lens designs. In this paper, I formulate the task of finding a new lens design that satisfies a given set of constraints as a search for the global minimum of a function of unknown and very large (∼ 30 – 100) number of dimensions. I address the significant complication that only a tiny fraction of the volume of the free parameters space is physically accessible. I propose a smart lens drafting algorithm which circumvents this difficulty. I present my numerical code which can be used to discover novel complex lens designs in a fully automatic fashion. I discuss the HPC aspects of the problem of searching for minima of high dimensionality functions.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.832
Threshold uncertainty score0.528

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.004
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 head0.157
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.159 · 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