MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3017581962 · doi:10.1364/ol.403362

Discrete dispersion scan setup for measuring few-cycle laser pulses in the mid-infrared

2020· article· en· W3017581962 on OpenAlexafffund
Nils C. Geib, Richard Hollinger, Elissa Haddad, Paul Herrmann, François Légaré, Thomas Pertsch, Christian Spielmann, Michael Zürch, Falk Eilenberger

Bibliographic record

VenueOptics Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLaser-Matter Interactions and Applications
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungDeutscher Akademischer AustauschdienstFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsDispersion (optics)OpticsWavelengthInterferometryLaserMonte Carlo methodPulse (music)Materials scienceInfraredPulse durationPhysicsMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, we demonstrate a discrete dispersion scan scheme using a low number of flat windows to vary the dispersion of laser pulses in discrete steps. Monte Carlo simulations indicate that the pulse duration can be retrieved accurately with less than 10 dispersion steps, which we verify experimentally by measuring few-cycle pulses and material dispersion curves at 3 and 10 µm wavelength. This minimal measuring scheme using only five optical components without the need for linear positioners and interferometric alignment can be readily implemented in many wavelength ranges and situations.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.232 · 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
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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptics LettersSame topicLaser-Matter Interactions and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207