MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045829695 · doi:10.1086/316539

Spectral‐Line Profiles in Daytime Skylight

2000· article· en· W2045829695 on OpenAlexaff
David F. Gray, C. Tycner, Kevin I. T. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenuePublications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicImpact of Light on Environment and Health
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSkylightPhysicsDaytimeSpectrographSkyObservatorySky brightnessLine (geometry)TelescopeSpectral lineRayleigh scatteringOpticsAstrophysicsAtmospheric sciencesAstronomyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 1.2 m telescope and coudé spectrograph at our Elginfield Observatory was used to investigate the suitability of daytime skylight as a reference spectrum for astrophysical work. We show that with sufficient care, skylight does give the flux (or disk‐integrated) spectrum of the Sun, allowing direct comparison with other stars. The line profiles in skylight become shallower with increasing angular separation from the Sun up to ≈100°, and then for larger angles they deepen slightly again. The amplitude of this variation is typically 3%–4% of the depth of the line. If the profiles are normalized to their central depths, their shapes remain unaltered. This implies that astrophysical analyses based on the shapes of spectral lines or ratios of depths of spectral lines in skylight should not be seriously affected. However, equivalent widths are not conserved; they can be reduced by up to the same 3%–4% unless care is taken to observe the sky close to the Sun or unless the angular variation is measured, as described here, and corrections applied. The skylight variations can be explained as a combination of aerosol and Rayleigh‐Brillouin scattering. There is no discernible dependence with altitude of the Sun, ruling out a significant ground‐albedo effect.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.220
Teacher spread0.210 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations35
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublications of the Astronomical Society of the PacificSame topicImpact of Light on Environment and HealthFrench-language works237,207