MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144335631 · doi:10.1109/nssmic.1997.672516

Solar Two High Energy Gamma Ray Observatory

2002· article· en· W2144335631 on OpenAlexaff
Tümay O. Tümer, D. Bhattacharya, M. Chantell, Z. Conner, P. Coppi, C. E. Covault, M. Dragovan, D. T. Gregorich, D. Hanna, U. Mohideen, R. A. Ong, S. M. Oser, K. Ragan, H. W. K. Tom, D. A. Williams

Bibliographic record

Venue1997 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeliostatObservatoryPhysicsTelescopeAngular resolution (graph drawing)Remote sensingGamma-ray astronomySolar telescopeSolar energyDetectorAstronomyMeteorologyAerospace engineeringGamma rayOpticsAstrophysicsEngineeringElectrical engineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Solar Two Gamma-Ray Telescope is planned as an extension to the STACEE Sandia experiment that is being developed for ground-based gamma-ray astronomy using the atmospheric Cherenkov detection technique in the energy range of 20 to 250 GeV. Because of its large effective light collection area, the STACEE and Solar Two Observatory will be able to reach low energy thresholds with very high angular resolution. A series of tests and observations has been made at Solar Two at Barstow, California and the National Solar Thermal Test Facility (NSTTF) at Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque, New Mexico. These measurements demonstrate the suitability of the site for astronomical observations and verify the performance of the telescope concept. A 48 heliostat detector is under construction at Sandia Laboratories and is expected to take data soon. A larger detector with /spl ges/80 heliostats is planned at the Solar Two, Barstow, California. If funded, the Solar Two Observatory is expected to be operational possibly within two to three years.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.664
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue1997 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference RecordSame topicAstrophysics and Cosmic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207