MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3026597492 · doi:10.1364/ao.393857

Subterahertz refractive flat-top beam shaping via 3D printed aspheric lens combination

2020· article· en· W3026597492 on OpenAlexafffund
Brad D. Price, Seth N. Lowry, Ian D. Hartley, Matt Reid

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Optics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTerahertz technology and applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Northern British Columbia
KeywordsOpticsLens (geology)Materials scienceRefractive indexBeam (structure)3d printedLight beamPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The viability of 3D printed aspheric lenses for the purpose of frequency-scalable subterahertz Gaussian to flat-top beam shaping is evaluated. A cylindrical one-dimensional Fresnel–Kirchhoff diffraction equation was implemented in Matlab and used to design a pair of aspheric lenses with customized vertex radius of curvature and conic constant. The lenses were printed at maximum possible resolution in acrylonitrile butadiene styrene ( <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mi>n</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>1.6</mml:mn> </mml:math> ) and tested with a 102 GHz continuous-wave subterahertz source. The aspheric lens combination produced a flat-top profile from a low-quality incident Gaussian beam at the minimal cost of 3D printing substrate. The flat-top profile exhibited small ( <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> <mml:mn>14</mml:mn> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi> </mml:math> root-mean-square deviation over a flat region) intensity fluctuations and is expected to prove useful in future terahertz applications that require a high degree of beam uniformity.

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)0.000
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 score0.514
Threshold uncertainty score0.849

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations13
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied OpticsSame topicTerahertz technology and applicationsFrench-language works237,207