MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3041607417

The Large Adaptive Reflector Concept

2006· article· en· W3041607417 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
S. M. Dougherty, P. E. Dewdney, A. D. Gray, A. R. Taylor

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadio Astronomy Observations and Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReflector (photography)Bandwidth (computing)Computer scienceParabolic antennaCassegrain antennaFeed hornOpticsTelecommunicationsRemote sensingPeriscope antennaPhysicsAntenna (radio)GeologyAntenna measurementLight source
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cost effective, new antenna technology is required to build the large collecting area being planned for the next generation of radio telescopes. The Large Adaptive Reflector (LAR) is a novel concept being developed in Canada to meet this challenge. A prototype with a 200-350m diameter reflector, operating up to 2 GHz with a bandwidth of 750 MHz is planned. With a collecting area up to ∼ 10 % of the planned SKA, and an array feed capable of imaging a 0.3 deg 2 field-of-view, the prototype would address a number of the most compelling questions in modern astrophysics. Key words: The LAR is a concept for a large diameter, large f/D parabolic reflector that requires an air-borne platform to support the prime focus receiver system. The active reflector surface has a very flat profile, supported over a large area, to reduce significantly the cost per unit area compared to traditional designs. A large field-of-view across a wide bandwidth is attained through the use of a focal plane phased array (Dewdney et al. 2002; Carlson et al. 2000). 1.1 Tethered Aerostat System As the LAR reflector has a focal length of several hundred metres, the Focal Point Apparatus (FPA) needs to be supported by a “sky-crane”, for which we have chosen a heliumfilled aerostat (Fig. 1). The aerostat is attached to the FPA via a leash, isolating the FPA from balloon motions, and the position of the FPA is controlled by six computer-controlled winches. This system is being evaluated using a 1/3-scale prototype (Fig. 1) to verify a computer simulation of the system. Once verified, the computer model becomes an extremely powerful design tool for the full-scale system. Recent tests on the prototype reveal that this system can work down to a zenith angle of 60 ◦ , while maintaining the position of the FPA to within a few centimetres, adequate for the focus design we propose (Sec. 1.3).

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.884
Threshold uncertainty score0.498

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRadio Astronomy Observations and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207