MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2049316757 · doi:10.1117/12.507388

Adaptive optics control system development

2003· article· en· W2049316757 on OpenAlexaffabout
Peter J. Hampton, Jean‐Pierre Véran, Colin Bradley, Aaron Hilton, Pan Agathoklis

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdaptive optics and wavefront sensing
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of AstrophysicsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeformable mirrorZernike polynomialsAdaptive opticsActuatorTilt (camera)Control systemWavefrontComputer scienceOpticsSIGNAL (programming language)Control theory (sociology)PhysicsEngineeringControl (management)Mechanical engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the current control system of the multi-conjugate adaptive optics (MCAO) test bench system that is being developed at the University of Victoria, BC, Canada. The design and analysis of a control system for an AO system employing a Micro-Electro-Mechanical-System (MEMS) based deformable mirror is presented. The AO system is part of a larger test bed that is a scale version of an 8-meter telescope. This paper focuses on the control of one deformable mirror with a Shack-Hartmann wave front sensor. Diagrams of how all the components work together as a control system are given. A conversion from actuator signal space to Zernike mode coefficients is presented. Analysis shows that this control system is capable of reducing low frequency aberrations. Shortcomings of the system error rejection are discussed. The steady state and step response to tilt simulated on the wave front sensor is shown.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.005

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations6
Published2003
Admission routes2
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