MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2506263331 · doi:10.1117/12.2233325

SKA CSP controls: technological challenges

2016· article· en· W2506263331 on OpenAlexaff
C. Baffa, E. Giani, Sonja Vrcic, Marina Vela Nuñez

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadio Astronomy Observations and Technology
Canadian institutionsDominion Astrophysical Observatory
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRadio telescopeTelescopeControl (management)Host (biology)KilometerTelecommunicationsScale (ratio)Systems engineeringEngineeringTransport engineeringAstronomyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Square Kilometer Array (SKA) project is an international effort to build the world's largest radio telescope, with eventually over a square kilometer of collecting area. For SKA Phase 1, Australia will host the low-frequency instrument with more than 500 stations, each containing around 250 individual antennas, whilst South Africa will host an array of close to 200 dishes. The scale of the SKA represents a huge leap forward in both engineering and research and development towards building and delivering a unique instrument, with the detailed design and preparation now well under way. As one of the largest scientific endeavors in history, the SKA will brings together close to 100 organizations from 20 countries. Every aspect of the design and development of such a large and complex instrument requires state-of-the-art technology and innovative approach. This poster (or paper) addresses some aspects of the SKA monitor and control system, and in particular describes the development and test results of the CSP Local Monitoring and Control prototype. At the SKA workshop held in April 2015, the SKA monitor and control community has chosen TANGO Control System as a framework, for the implementation of the SKA monitor and control. This decision will have a large impact on Monitor an Control development of SKA. As work is on the way to incorporate TANGO Control System in SKA is in progress, we started to development a prototype for the SKA Central Signal Processor to mitigate the associated risks. In particular we now have developed a uniform class schema proposal for the sub-Element systems of the SKA-CSP.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.642
Threshold uncertainty score0.772

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicRadio Astronomy Observations and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207