MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093345329 · doi:10.1364/oe.19.021271

Fast iterative algorithm (FIA) for controlling MEMS deformable mirrors: principle and laboratory demonstration

2011· article· en· W2093345329 on OpenAlexaff
Célia Blain, Olivier Guyon, Colin Bradley, Olivier Lardière

Bibliographic record

VenueOptics Express · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdaptive optics and wavefront sensing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeformable mirrorAdaptive opticsActuatorAlgorithmOpticsPhase (matter)Displacement (psychology)PhysicsWavefrontComputer scienceMicroelectromechanical systemsControl theory (sociology)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a fast and high accuracy iterative algorithm to control Micro-Electro-Mechanical-System (MEMS) deformable mirrors (DMs) for open-loop (OL) adaptive optics (AO) applications. Our approach relies on a simple physical model for the forces applied on DM actuators and membrane, defined by a small number of parameters that we measure in an experimental setup. The algorithm iteratively applies forces and updates actuator displacements, allowing real-time utilization in an Extreme-AO system (control rate ≥ Khz). Our measurements show that it reproduces Kolmogorov type phase screens with an error equal to 7.3% of the rms of the desired phase (1.6% of the peak-to-valley of the desired phase). This performance corresponds to an improvement of a factor three compared to the standard quadratic model (common relation between voltage and actuator displacement). Originally developed for the DM control of the Subaru Coronagraphic Extreme-AO (SCExAO) project, the algorithm is also suitable for Multi-Object AO systems.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptics ExpressSame topicAdaptive optics and wavefront sensingFrench-language works237,207