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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.009

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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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