MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3105403851

Preliminary DIMM and MASS Nighttime Seeing Measurements at PEARL, in the Canadian High Arctic

2016· article· en· W3105403851 on OpenAlexaffabout
Eric Steinbring, Maxwell A. Millar‐Blanchaer, Wayne Ngan, Rick Murowinski, Brian Leckie, R. G. Carlberg

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdaptive optics and wavefront sensing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingMeteorologyWind speedAtmospheric sciencesPearlGeologyPhysicsGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Results of deploying a Differential Image Motion Monitor (DIMM) and a DIMM combined with a Multi-Aperture Scintillation Sensor (MASS/DIMM) are reported for campaigns in 2011 and 2012 on the roof of the Polar Environment Atmospheric Research Laboratory (PEARL). This facility is on a 610-m-high ridge at latitude 80 degrees N, near the Eureka weatherstation on Ellesmere Island, Canada. The median seeing at 8-m elevation is 0.85 arcsec or better based on DIMM data alone, but is dependent on wind direction, and likely includes a component due to the PEARL building itself. Results with MASS/DIMM yield a median seeing less than 0.76 arcsec. A semi-empirical model of seeing versus ground wind speed is introduced which allows agreement between these datasets, and with previous boundary-layer profiling by lunar scintillometry from the same location. This further suggests that best 20 percentile seeing reaches 0.53 arcsec, of which typically 0.30 arcsec is due to the free atmosphere. Some discussion for guiding future seeing instrumentation and characterization at this site is provided.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score0.259

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations12
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdaptive optics and wavefront sensingFrench-language works237,207