MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799915532 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2007-0009

MODELING AND PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF OPTICAL SYSTEMS USING SKEW RAY TRACING

2007· article· en· W2799915532 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Te-Tan Liao, Jing-Fung Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Measurement and Metrology Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Council
KeywordsRay tracing (physics)SkewComputer scienceSensitivity (control systems)Transformation matrixMonochromatic colorTransformation (genetics)Boundary (topology)TracingOpticsFunction (biology)Ray transfer matrix analysisGeometrical opticsBoundary value problemMatrix (chemical analysis)AlgorithmPhysicsMathematicsElectronic engineeringMathematical analysisEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper applies a computational geometric algebra approach based on a 4 x 4 homogeneous transformation matrix to model optical systems and to evaluate their performance. In the proposed approach, the directions of the refracted/reflected rays at each boundary in the optical system are determined using skew ray tracing based upon Snell’s law. The differential changes in the image coordinates caused by optical aberrations are derived for both polychromatic and monochromatic light by applying a sensitivity analysis approach. Finally, a merit function is constructed comprising five individual defect items in order to evaluate the overall performance of a generic optical system. The proposed analytical approach provides a comprehensive and robust approach for the modeling and evaluation of optical systems.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.621
Threshold uncertainty score0.368

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicAdvanced Measurement and Metrology TechniquesFrench-language works237,207