MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062598141 · doi:10.1117/12.787933

Monte Carlo simulation framework for TMT

2008· article· en· W2062598141 on OpenAlex
Konstantinos Vogiatzis, George Z. Angeli

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdaptive optics and wavefront sensing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science CouncilOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationAssociation of Canadian Universities for Research in AstronomyResearch and Innovation FoundationGordon and Betty Moore Foundation
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodComputer scienceAzimuthWind speedSimulationTelescopeSampling (signal processing)Computational fluid dynamicsOpticsPhysicsMeteorologyTelecommunicationsMechanicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This presentation describes a strategy for assessing the performance of the Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT). A Monte Carlo Simulation Framework has been developed to combine optical modeling with Computational Fluid Dynamics simulations (CFD), Finite Element Analysis (FEA) and controls to model the overall performance of TMT. The framework consists of a two year record of observed environmental parameters such as atmospheric seeing, site wind speed and direction, ambient temperature and local sunset and sunrise times, along with telescope azimuth and elevation with a given sampling rate. The modeled optical, dynamic and thermal seeing aberrations are available in a matrix form for distinct values within the range of influencing parameters. These parameters are either part of the framework parameter set or can be derived from them at each time-step. As time advances, the aberrations are interpolated and combined based on the current value of their parameters. Different scenarios can be generated based on operating parameters such as venting strategy, optical calibration frequency and heat source control. Performance probability distributions are obtained and provide design guidance. The sensitivity of the system to design, operating and environmental parameters can be assessed in order to maximize the % of time the system meets the performance specifications.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.912
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.228 · 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