MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2565847570 · doi:10.1063/1.4972518

A general method for baseline-removal in ultrafast electron powder diffraction data using the dual-tree complex wavelet transform

2016· article· en· W2565847570 on OpenAlexaff
Laurent P. René de Cotret, Bradley J. Siwick

Bibliographic record

VenueStructural Dynamics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicTransition Metal Oxide Nanomaterials
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBackground subtractionComplex wavelet transformDiffractionWaveletComputer sciencePowder diffractionWavelet transformUltrashort pulseAlgorithmDiscrete wavelet transformMaterials scienceArtificial intelligenceOpticsPhysicsNuclear magnetic resonance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The general problem of background subtraction in ultrafast electron powder diffraction (UEPD) is presented with a focus on the diffraction patterns obtained from materials of moderately complex structure which contain many overlapping peaks and effectively no scattering vector regions that can be considered exclusively background. We compare the performance of background subtraction algorithms based on discrete and dual-tree complex (DTCWT) wavelet transforms when applied to simulated UEPD data on the M1–R phase transition in VO2 with a time-varying background. We find that the DTCWT approach is capable of extracting intensities that are accurate to better than 2% across the whole range of scattering vector simulated, effectively independent of delay time. A Python package is available.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.004

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.291 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations21
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStructural DynamicsSame topicTransition Metal Oxide NanomaterialsFrench-language works237,207