Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a technique for generating numerically an incident tapered beam of a prescribed polarization and a prescribed incidence angle by summing a finite number of propagating uniform plane waves, each constituent plane wave having its own magnitude, phase, incidence angle and polarization. Our three ad-hoc schemes for choosing the magnitude, the incidence angle and the polarization of a constituent plane wave are different from those by Braunisch et al. Our choice of the propagating plane waves corresponds to a sampling of the physical angular (/spl theta/, /spl phi/) space. This contrasts with the two-dimensional Fourier transform technique by Braunisch et al. and its Cartesian sampling of the (k/sub x/, k/sub y/) spectral plane where k/sub x/=(k/sub o/sin/spl theta/cos/spl phi/) and k/sub y/=(k/sub o/sin/spl theta/sin/spl phi/). Our technique is based on the summation of only propagating plane waves, whereas the technique by Braunisch et al. is based on the summation of both propagating and evanescent plane waves.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".