MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2309288558 · doi:10.5194/gi-5-493-2016

Auroral meridian scanning photometer calibration using Jupiter

2016· article· en· W2309288558 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeoscientific instrumentation, methods and data systems · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCalibration and Measurement Techniques
Canadian institutionsAthabasca UniversityNatural Resources CanadaUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Space AgencyAthabasca University
KeywordsPhotometerMeridian (astronomy)Remote sensingCalibrationPhotometry (optics)Environmental scienceWavelengthGeologyOpticsGeodesyPhysicsAstronomyStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Observations of astronomical sources provide information that can significantly enhance the utility of auroral data for scientific studies. This report presents results obtained by using Jupiter for field cross calibration of four multispectral auroral meridian scanning photometers during the 2011–2015 Northern Hemisphere winters. Seasonal average optical field-of-view and local orientation estimates are obtained with uncertainties of 0.01 and 0.1°, respectively. Estimates of absolute sensitivity are repeatable to roughly 5 % from one month to the next, while the relative response between different wavelength channels is stable to better than 1 %. Astronomical field calibrations and darkroom calibration differences are on the order of 10 %. Atmospheric variability is the primary source of uncertainty; this may be reduced with complementary data from co-located instruments.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.685
Threshold uncertainty score0.475

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.268 · 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