MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3114920665 · doi:10.1364/josab.427298

Atomic transitions for adaptive optics

2021· article· en· W3114920665 on OpenAlexafffund
Rui Yang, Joschua Hellemeier, Paul Hickson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Optical Society of America B · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaYunnan Provincial Department of EducationChinese Academy of Sciences
KeywordsWavelengthExcitationUltravioletAtomic physicsStarsIonLaserMesospherePhysicsGround stateMaterials scienceOptoelectronicsOpticsAstrophysicsAtmospheric sciences

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adaptive optics systems using sodium laser guide stars are widely employed at major astronomical observatories. It is natural to ask whether other atomic species might offer advantages. In this paper, we review all abundant atoms and ions in the upper atmosphere, including Na, Fe, M g + , S i + , C a + , and K and also the non-metallic species N, N + , O, and H, considering their potential for adaptive optics. Return fluxes for all transitions that can be excited using either one or two wavelengths were computed. We also considered multi-wavelength emission, comparing the performance of different transitions for polychromatic laser guide star (PLGS) adaptive optics. We find that of all the mesospheric metals, Na is the most suitable for both monochromatic laser guide stars and PLGSs, providing about six times more return flux than the best transitions in Fe. For high-altitude observatories, excitation at 330 nm in Na should give the highest PLGS performance. Atomic O, N, and N + have strong transitions and very high abundances in the mesosphere. This makes them potential candidates for the generation of intense laser guide stars by amplified spontaneous emission, if a suitable excitation process can be demonstrated. Direct excitation by CW lasers is impractical, as all transitions from the ground state are beyond the atmospheric cutoff. Nevertheless, it may be possible using high-power pulsed lasers.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.009

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Optical Society of America BSame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207