MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074333327 · doi:10.1364/ao.47.006563

Relation between circular and linear depolarization ratios under multiple-scattering conditions

2008· article· en· W2074333327 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Optics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric aerosols and clouds
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAzimuthLidarScatteringOpticsDepolarizationPolarization (electrochemistry)Circular polarizationPhysicsDepolarization ratioForward scatterLight scatteringLinear polarizationComputational physicsRemote sensingLaserGeologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A simple relationship is established between the linear and the circular depolarization ratios averaged over the azimuth angle of clouds made of spherical particles. The relationship is validated theoretically using double-scattering calculations; in the framework, the measurements are performed with a multiple-field-of-view lidar (MFOV) lidar. The relationship is also validated using data obtained with MFOV lidar equipped with linear and circular polarization measurement capabilities. The experimental data support theoretical results for small optical depths. At higher optical depths and large fields of view, the contribution of multiple scatterings is important; experimental data suggest that the relationship established between the linear and circular depolarization stays valid as long as the main depolarization mechanism comes from one scattering (most likely a backscattering a few degrees away from 180 degrees ).

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.154
Threshold uncertainty score0.368

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.217
Teacher spread0.200 · 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