MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111654243 · doi:10.1364/josaa.24.003644

Apodizing functions for Fourier transform spectroscopy

2007· article· en· W2111654243 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Optical Society of America A · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicScientific Research and Discoveries
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResolution (logic)Fourier transformPath (computing)SpectroscopyLine (geometry)OpticsPhysicsFourier transform infrared spectroscopySpectral resolutionFourier transform spectroscopyMagnitude (astronomy)Spectral lineMathematicsMaterials scienceAlgorithmMathematical analysisComputer scienceGeometryAstrophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Apodizing functions are used in Fourier transform spectroscopy (FTS) to reduce the magnitude of the sidelobes in the instrumental line shape (ILS), which are a direct result of the finite maximum optical path difference in the measured interferogram. Three apodizing functions, which are considered optimal in the sense of producing the smallest loss in spectral resolution for a given reduction in the magnitude of the largest sidelobe, find frequent use in FTS [J. Opt. Soc. Am.66, 259 (1976)]. We extend this series to include optimal apodizing functions corresponding to increases in the width of the ILS ranging from factors of 1.1 to 2.0 compared with its unapodized value, and we compare the results with other commonly used apodizing functions.

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.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.770
Threshold uncertainty score0.148

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.283 · 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