MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2068544323 · doi:10.1117/12.513382

CGH null design and fabrication for CFH telescope simulator

2004· article· en· W2068544323 on OpenAlexaffabout
Min Wang, Simon Thibault

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdaptive optics and wavefront sensing
Canadian institutionsInstitut National d'Optique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceFabricationSimulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A wavefront-generated simulator for Canada-France-Hawaii (CFH) 3.6-m telescope to test a novel wide-field IR camera (WIRCAM) of the telescope is presented. We investigate a Computer-Generated Hologram (CGH) wavefront generator to demonstrate off-axis aberrated wavefront generation with and with no rotational symmetry modes of Zernike polynomial as telescope wavefront simulator. A CGH simulator system to generate field optical performance of CFH telescope, while working on a F/3.8 prima focus with an field-of-view (FOV) of ±15 arcmin, is designed and computed for WIRCAM tests in optical labs for system performance evaluation. The CGH simulator is modeled as a diffractive surface defined by a phase function, and the optical phase function is specified by a Zernike polynomial phase equation. As the CGH simulator has to work in the first diffraction order, a carrier frequency must be added to the phase function in such a way to ensure the separation of the diffraction orders for eliminating unwanted light in the WIRCAM tests. Finally the nominal-design performance of the CGH simulator is compared with the tolerance analysis predictions as well as the system misalignment sensitivity.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE→Same topicAdaptive optics and wavefront sensing→French-language works237,207→