MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2746449961 · doi:10.1063/1.4997959

Instrumentation for ice crystal characterization in laboratory using interferometric out-of-focus imaging

2017· article· en· W2746449961 on OpenAlexaff
Marc Brunel, Gilles Demange, Michaël Fromager, Mohamed Talbi, H. Zapolsky, Renaud Patte, Kamel Aı̈t-Ameur, Justin Jacquot-Kielar, Sébastien Coëtmellec, Gérard Gréhan, B. Quevreux

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Scientific Instruments · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIcing and De-icing Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersAgence Nationale de la RechercheLabex EMC3
KeywordsInstrumentation (computer programming)InterferometryCalibrationCharacterization (materials science)Focus (optics)HolographyRemote sensingComputer scienceOpticsIce crystalsMaterials sciencePhysicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Airborne characterization of ice crystals has important applications. The extreme difficulty of realizing in situ tests requires the development of a complete instrumentation in the laboratory. Such an installation should enable design, development, test, and calibration of instruments in conditions as close as possible to real ones. We present a set of numerical and experimental tools that have been developed to realize ice crystal sensors based on interferometric particle imaging. The set of tools covers the development of complementary simulators for crystal growth and interferometric particle imaging predictions, experimental generation of "programmable" ice crystals, and instrumentation of a freezing column where different techniques as in-focus imaging, out-of-focus imaging, and digital in-line holography can be combined simultaneously for test and calibration.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.715
Threshold uncertainty score0.469

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Scientific InstrumentsSame topicIcing and De-icing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207