MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092391402 · doi:10.1117/12.458750

<title>Physical wavelets: applications in optics</title>

2002· article· en· W2092391402 on OpenAlexaff
Sylvain Deschênes, Yunlong Sheng

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Polarization and Ellipsometry
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWaveletWavelet transformScalar (mathematics)DiffractionComputer scienceOpticsTransformation (genetics)Physical opticsTransformation opticsEquivalence (formal languages)AlgorithmPhysicsMathematicsArtificial intelligencePure mathematicsGeometryMetamaterial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the last decade, the optics community has shown interest in building bridges between mathematical wavelets and optical phenomena. In a first time, we review some of the previous works done on the subject. Namely, we discuss the optical implementation of the transform, as well as its utilization in relation with optical pattern matching. A short discussion on works, unfortunately falling short to explain scalar diffraction in terms of a wavelet transform, is presented. At this point, we introduce the physical wavelet (Psi) . After portraying the mathematical properties of (Psi) , we describe its contributions to the optical world. Actually, this wavelet being a solution of Maxwell's equations, we derive interesting optical properties from its mathematical behavior. For instance, looking more closely to the scalar projection of this wavelet, we demonstrate the equivalence between Huygens' diffraction principle and the wavelet transform using y as the transformation kernel. Another application involves a closely related form of this wavelet that can be used to generate limited diffraction beams.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.100

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.013

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 head0.214
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicOptical Polarization and EllipsometryFrench-language works237,207