MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152568320 · doi:10.1117/12.862705

Hyperspectral datacube estimations of binary stars with the Computed Tomographic Imaging Spectrometer (CTIS)

2010· article· en· W2152568320 on OpenAlexfundno aff
James F. Scholl, E. K. Hege, Daniel O'Connell, Eustace L. Dereniak

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Polarization and Ellipsometry
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistère de la Santé et des Services sociaux
KeywordsHyperspectral imagingPhotometry (optics)Imaging spectrometerData cubePhysicsBinary numberRemote sensingComputer scienceSpectrometerArtificial intelligenceStarsOpticsComputer visionMathematicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using mathematical techniques recently adapted for the analysis of hyperspectral imaging systems such as the CTIS, we have performed datacube reconstructions for a number of binary star systems. The CTIS images in the visible (420nm to 720nm) wavelength range were obtained in 2001 using the 3.67m Advanced Electro Optical System (AEOS) of the Maui Space Surveillance System (MSSS). These methods used an analytical model of the CTIS to construct an imaging system operator from optical, focal plane array and Computer Generated Holographic (CGH) disperser parameters in the CTIS. We used the adjoint of this operator to construct matched filtered estimates of the datacubes from the image data. In these reconstructions we are able to simultaneously obtain information on the geometry and relative photometry of the binary systems as well as the spectrum for each component of the system.

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.210
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicOptical Polarization and EllipsometryFrench-language works237,207