MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3106147402

Flowdown of the TMT astrometry error budget(s) to the IRIS design

2016· article· en· W3106147402 on OpenAlexaff
Matthias Schöck, David R. Andersen, John A. Rogers, Brent L. Ellerbroek, Eric M. Chisholm, Jennifer Dunn, Glen Herriot, James Larkin, Anna Moore, Ryuji Suzuki, James Wincentsen, S. Wright

Bibliographic record

VenueCaltechAUTHORS (California Institute of Technology) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdaptive optics and wavefront sensing
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAstrometryComputer scienceCalibrationData reductionSimulationRemote sensingData miningComputer visionMathematicsStatisticsGeologyStars
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TMT has defined the accuracy to be achieved for both absolute and differential astrometry in its top-level requirements documents. Because of the complexities of different types of astrometric observations, these requirements cannot be used to specify system design parameters directly. The TMT astrometry working group therefore developed detailed astrometry error budgets for a variety of science cases. These error budgets detail how astrometric errors propagate through the calibration, observing and data reduction processes. The budgets need to be condensed into sets of specific requirements that can be used by each subsystem team for design purposes. We show how this flowdown from error budgets to design requirements is achieved for the case of TMT's first-light Infrared Imaging Spectrometer (IRIS) instrument.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.057
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.132

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.057
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.005

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCaltechAUTHORS (California Institute of Technology)Same topicAdaptive optics and wavefront sensingFrench-language works237,207