MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106537514 · doi:10.1364/josab.21.000908

Limits in wavelength measurement of optical signals

2004· article· en· W2106537514 on OpenAlexaff
D.J.F. Cooper, Peter W. E. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Optical Society of America B · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Fiber Optic Sensors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWavelengthOpticsBandwidth (computing)Optical powerSIGNAL (programming language)PhysicsCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Optical coherence tomographyMaterials scienceLimit (mathematics)OptoelectronicsComputer scienceTelecommunicationsLaserMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We determine the maximum accuracy in the wavelength measurement of finite-bandwidth optical signals. The limit is dependent on the spectral and coherence properties of the optical signal and on the available optical power. We also investigate the effect of finite measurement resolution in the wavelength measurement.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.073
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.073
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.009
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0040.004
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations11
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Optical Society of America BSame topicAdvanced Fiber Optic SensorsFrench-language works237,207