MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2331262350 · doi:10.1021/ac401864g

Combined Stokes Vector and Mueller Matrix Polarimetry for Materials Characterization

2013· article· en· W2331262350 on OpenAlexafffund
Shaun A. Hall, Marc-André M. Hoyle, Joshua Post, Dennis K. Hore

Bibliographic record

VenueAnalytical Chemistry · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Polarization and Ellipsometry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMueller calculusPolarimeterPolarimetryStokes parametersPolarization (electrochemistry)Characterization (materials science)IsotropyMatrix (chemical analysis)ChemistryOpticsPhysicsScatteringChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A robust way of measuring the optical properties of any material is to interrogate it with light of different polarizations. The 16-element Mueller matrix provides the most complete description of the optical properties of a sample based on its ability to alter the polarization state of transmitted or reflected light. This is valuable for ordered and isotropic materials alike. Similarly, the 4-element Stokes vector is the most complete description of the polarization of a light beam, including any depolarization effects. While the Mueller matrix offers the most chemical and physical insight, the Stokes vectors are easier to obtain, and there are more schemes for measuring them quickly in situations where time resolution is important. We describe a method where any Stokes polarimeter may be adapted to obtain Mueller matrices and discuss various approaches for achieving better time resolution.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.217
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations38
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnalytical ChemistrySame topicOptical Polarization and EllipsometryFrench-language works237,207