Integrating rod homogeneity as a function of cross-sectional shape
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present preliminary results from an analysis of irradiance patterns from integrating rods. A new metric is proposed to provide a more rigorous characterization of homogeneity as compared to the current ANSI standard for illumination and brightness of rectangular integrating rods used in the projector and display industry. This new metric is used in a computational ray-trace analysis to compare the relative homogenizing efficiency of integrating rods as a function of the polygon order of the cross section. Our analysis is performed for an ideal surface-emitting disk in order to yield general insight into the workings of integrating rods for common light sources, and a for full radiometric source model based on measurements of a reflectorized 100W Hg arc lamp. Simulation results indicate that a high degree of homogenization can be achieved for integrating rods with cross sections of polygon order equal to or less than 10. These results refute the commonly held belief that only integrating rods with tileable cross-sectional shapes are effective homogenizers. These results are particularly significant for optical applications in the materials processing industry.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".