Truncated-inverted-pyramid light emitting diode geometry optimisation using ray tracing technique
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The authors have optimised the light emitting diodes (LED) of truncated-inverted-pyramid (TIP) geometry using the ray tracing technique together with electronics simulation. A unique feature of their ray tracing technique is the geometrical treatment combined with a wave optics approach, taking into account refraction, reflection, absorption and interference effects. Their model enables the computation of the angular distribution of the transmitted power of an LED of arbitrary geometry in two dimensions. They have analysed the light power transmitted into a selected angular sector. It is different from known TIP LED experimental results because a wide range of angles have been used in the simulation so that more detailed pictures could be analysed. For example, three major peaks of the light output power in an inclination angle dependency have been discovered. The variations of the structural parameters of TIP LEDs allowed the authors to define some other optimal parameters for a variety of purposes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it