MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047048412 · doi:10.1119/1.2060650

A Demonstration of the Critical Angle Without Using Total Internal Reflection

2005· article· en· W2047048412 on OpenAlexaff
Barret R. Viss, Arnold E. Sikkema

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Physics Teacher · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsTrinity Western UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTotal internal reflectionTotal external reflectionOpticsSnell's lawRefractionPhysicsReflection (computer programming)Refractive indexCritical frequencyContact angleSurface (topology)Acute angleSolid angleGeometryMathematicsDetector

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The success of a light ray's transmission to a medium of lower index of refraction depends upon its incident angle at the boundary. If this angle, when measured from the normal, is greater than a certain critical angle, the ray will reflect totally, remaining in the high-index medium. Snell's law, which says that n1 sin θ1 = n2 sin θ2, easily gives the critical angle as θ1 = sin−1(n2/n1) by setting the angle of refraction to θ2 = 90°. Demonstrations of the critical angle phenomenon usually work with this operational definition. For example, as in Fig. 1, one directs a beam of light radially through the curved surface of a semicircular piece of glass and rotates the semicircle until no ray is seen exiting the flat surface. We describe here a demonstration of the critical angle that does not employ rays leaving the higher-index medium but entering it.

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)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations8
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Physics TeacherSame topicPhotonic and Optical DevicesFrench-language works237,207