MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2275801412 · doi:10.1080/02786826.2015.1131809

A light-weight, high-sensitivity particle spectrometer for PM2.5 aerosol measurements

2015· article· en· W2275801412 on OpenAlexaff
R. S. Gao, Hagen Telg, Rob McLaughlin, S. J. Ciciora, L. A. Watts, M. Richardson, Joshua P. Schwarz, A. E. Perring, Troy Thornberry, Andrew W. Rollins, M. Z. Markovic, T. S. Bates, James E. Johnson, D. W. Fahey

Bibliographic record

VenueAerosol Science and Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpectrometerAerosolParticle sizeEnvironmental scienceElectronicsRange (aeronautics)Particle (ecology)OpticsRemote sensingMaterials sciencePhysicsEngineeringElectrical engineeringAerospace engineeringMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A light-weight, low-cost optical particle spectrometer for measurements of aerosol number concentrations and size distributions has been designed, constructed, and demonstrated. The spectrometer is suitable for use on small, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and in balloon sondes. The spectrometer uses a 405 nm diode laser to count and size individual particles in the size range 140–3000 nm. A compact data system combines custom electronics with a single-board commercial computer. Power consumption is 7W at 9–15 V. 3D printing technology was used in the construction of the instrument to reduce cost, manufacturing complexity, and weight. The resulting Printed Optical Particle Spectrometer (POPS) instrument weighs about 800 g with an approximate materials cost of 2500 USD. Several POPS units have been constructed, tested in the laboratory, and deployed on UAVs. Here we present an overview of the instrument design and construction, laboratory validation data, and field engineering data for POPS.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations191
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAerosol Science and TechnologySame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207