A Study of The Maximum Resolution of 2D Mirror Galvanometer Pointwise Scan Laser Display
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To obtain the maximum resolution of 2D mirror galvanometer pointwise scan laser display,the laser beam should scan the most points on the screen within the time T which is equal to 1/f,where f is the frame rate.Suppose that the minimum time spent to scan one point is t,so the maximum resolution is T/t.In contrast to traditional raster scan based on electrostatic or magnetic deflection,the mirror galvanometer is based on the mechanical deflection.The small angle step response time specification of the mirror galvanometer determines that the larger the deflection angle step,the longer the response time spent to reach the target position.The horizontal and vertical blanks in raster scanning all would result in the large angle step response,and in that the time spent to scan lines is almost equal to the blanks.So,raster scanning based on a mirror galvanometer only obtains nearly half the maximum resolution.This paper proposes one novel scan method called pointwise consistent scan which guarantees that the time spent to scan any point is the minimum time t,and which completely eliminates the blanks.Using this method can achieve the maximum scan display 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".