MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2330592822 · doi:10.2514/6.2013-1523

Ultra-Thin Highly Deformable Composite Mirrors

2013· article· en· W2330592822 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venue54th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdaptive optics and wavefront sensing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCalifornia Institute of Technology
KeywordsComposite numberMaterials scienceComputer scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Optical quality mirrors are heavy, expensive and difficult to manufacture. This paper presents a novel mirror concept based on an active laminate consisting of an ultra-thin carbon-fiber shell bonded to a piezo-ceramic active layer coated with patterned electrodes. Mirrors based on this concept are less than 1 mm thick and hence are very lightweight and flexible. They also have a large dynamic range of actuation that allows them to take up a wide range of deformed configurations. This concept is compatible with relatively high-volume manufacturing processes and can potentially achieve a significant reduction in cost in comparison to currently available active mirrors. It is also suitable for applications ranging from concentrators for solar power generation to primary mirrors for optical telescopes. The paper presents an overview of the mirror components as well as a simple design relationship for sizing the active layer. The expected performance of a preliminary design for a 1 m diameter mirror with a radius of curvature of 15 m is computed numerically, showing that a set of 96 actuators can remove an edge-to-edge manufacturing-induced cylindrical curvature of 5 mm to an RMS accuracy of 50 μm. The prescription of the mirror can also be adjusted to a radius of curvature of 11 m with an accuracy of 160 μm. The development and characterization of a proof-of-concept prototype mirror is also presented.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.366
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.213 · 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