MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078537943 · doi:10.1117/12.732528

A comprehensive model to predict solid state lighting performance

2007· article· en· W2078537943 on OpenAlexaff
Marc Salsbury, Ian Ashdown

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSemiconductor Lasers and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsPhilips (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJunction temperatureDissipationThermalFeed forwardComputer scienceLight-emitting diodeThermal management of electronic devices and systemsBandwidth (computing)Heat sinkControl theory (sociology)Materials scienceMechanical engineeringOptoelectronicsControl engineeringEngineeringPhysicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A tool to predict the behavior of LED-based luminaires is critical to their design. In the absence of such a tool, the design process becomes quite laborious and highly dependant on expensive experimental work. Unfortunately, thermal effects can make the system level behavior very difficult to predict: a change in temperature causes a change in spectral characteristics, which in turn causes an adjustment to the balance of the LEDs, affecting the heat load, and thereby once again changing the spectral characteristics. In order to accurately predict how a SSL luminaire will behave, it is necessary to model it at the system level. An accurate model must consider heat loading/dissipation, the response of electrical components to temperature, the effect of temperature on spectral characteristics (including intensity, spectral bandwidth, and peak wavelength), and then recursively recalculate the heat load. We have developed just such a model for a luminaire employing optical feedback and thermal feedforward. The model makes use of measured data for the components, and computes its system-level behavior. The model also computes the change in behavior due to aging, based on the junction temperature. The model has been verified by experiment, and found to agree to within ten percent. The aging predictions have not yet been verified.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.572
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicSemiconductor Lasers and Optical DevicesFrench-language works237,207