MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131235468 · doi:10.1364/ao.52.003864

Beam profile for the Herschel–SPIRE Fourier transform spectrometer

2013· article· en· W2131235468 on OpenAlexafffund
Gibion Makiwa, David Naylor, Marc Ferlet, C. Salji, B. M. Swinyard, E. T. Polehampton, M. H. D. van der Wiel

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Optics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Astronomical Observatories, Chinese Academy of SciencesScience and Technology Facilities CouncilSwedish National Space AgencyNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsSpire (mollusc)OpticsSpectrometerBolometerPhysicsSpace observatoryImaging spectroscopyFourier transform spectroscopyImaging spectrometerBeam (structure)WavelengthSpectral imagingRemote sensingObservatoryFourier transformSpectroscopyFourier transform infrared spectroscopyDetectorInfraredAstronomyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the instruments on board the Herschel Space Observatory is the Spectral and Photometric Imaging Receiver (SPIRE). SPIRE employs a Fourier transform spectrometer with feed-horn-coupled bolometers to provide imaging spectroscopy. To interpret the resultant spectral images requires knowledge of the wavelength-dependent beam, which in the case of SPIRE is complicated by the use of multimoded feed horns. In this paper we describe a series of observations and the analysis conducted to determine the wavelength dependence of the SPIRE spectrometer beam profile.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.007

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations43
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied OpticsSame topicAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesFrench-language works237,207