MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086961797 · doi:10.1117/12.618568

Optical performance analysis and optimization of large telescope structural designs

2005· article· en· W2086961797 on OpenAlexaff
Scott Roberts, Simon Sun, Dan Kerley

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdaptive optics and wavefront sensing
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrimary mirrorTelescopeComputer scienceAdaptive opticsActuatorDeformable mirrorOpticsSecondary mirrorWavefrontPiston (optics)Deflection (physics)Zernike polynomialsOptical aberrationOptical pathPhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe a tool to analyze the effects of gravity induced deflections on a telescope structure with segmented primary mirror optics. An objective of the telescope structural design process is to minimize image quality degradation due to uncorrectable static deflections of the optics under gravity, while ensuring that the overall system meets several requirements including limits of maximum primary mirror actuator stroke, segment rotation and decenter, and secondary mirror actuation. These design and performance criteria are not readily calculated within a finite element program. Our Merit Function routine, implemented in MATLAB and called by ANSYS, calculates these parameters and makes them available within ANSYS for evaluation and design optimization. In this analysis, ANSYS outputs key structural-model nodal displacements to a file, which are used to determine the 6 degree of freedom motion of the telescope's optical surfaces. MATLAB then utilizes these displacements, along with a database containing coordinate system transforms and a linear optics model derived from ZEMAX, to calculate various performance criteria. The values returned to ANSYS can be used to iteratively optimize performance over a set of structural design parameters. Optical parameters calculated by this routine include the optical path difference at the pupil, RMS wavefront, encircled energy and low order Zernike terms resulting from primary mirror segment rotation and decenter. Also reported are the maximum actuator strokes required to restore tip-tilt and piston of the primary mirror segments, and the deflection of the secondary mirror under gravitational load. The merit function routine is being used by the Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT) project to optimize and assess the performance of various telescope structural designs. This paper describes the mathematical basis of the calculations, their implementation and gives preliminary results of the TMT Telescope Structure Reference Design.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.852
Threshold uncertainty score0.827

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.218 · 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.

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

Citations6
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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