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

Apodizing functions for Fourier transform spectroscopy

2007· article· en· W2111654243 on OpenAlexaff
David A. Naylor, Margaret K. Tahic

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.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.008

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

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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations107
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Optical Society of America ASame topicScientific Research and DiscoveriesFrench-language works237,207