MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122161984 · doi:10.1002/mop.25383

Single‐wavelength fiber laser for localized temperature monitoring

2010· article· en· W2122161984 on OpenAlexafffund
Zachary Chaboyer, Jonas K. Valiunas, Brian D. Adams, Aicheng Chen, Gautam Das

Bibliographic record

VenueMicrowave and Optical Technology Letters · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Fiber Optic Sensors
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMaterials scienceFiber Bragg gratingLaserSpectrum analyzerOpticsMicrowaveWavelengthFiber laserOptical fiberFiber optic sensorOptoelectronicsSingle-mode optical fiberLongitudinal modeTelecommunicationsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We report on a single‐longitudinal‐mode single‐wavelength fiber laser and its applications for measuring localized temperature variation. The laser was developed using a fiber Bragg grating. The laser wavelength was single‐longitudinal‐mode with optical signal‐to‐noise ratio (OSNR) of more than 40 dB. The temperature sensitivity of the system was 11.08 pm/°C. To demonstrate the promising application of the laser sensor developed, we used the sensor to monitor the localized temperature of TiO2 nanotubes during the photochemical process, and superparamagnetic iron oxides nanoparticles when exposed to low frequency magnetic field. The output of the laser was monitored using a scanning Fabry–Perot spectrum analyzer of resolution 6.7 MHz and an optical spectrum analyzer of resolution 3.75 GHz. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Microwave Opt Technol Lett 52: 1941–1946, 2010; Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience. wiley.com). DOI 10.1002/mop.25383

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicrowave and Optical Technology LettersSame topicAdvanced Fiber Optic SensorsFrench-language works237,207