MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4286713871 · doi:10.1063/5.0099160

Molding arrays of tertiary optical elements for microcell receivers

2022· article· en· W4286713871 on OpenAlexafffund
Richard S. Norman, Étienne Léveillé, Nathan Caillou, Jade Blais, Stephan Rosa, Vincent Aimez, Luc G. Fréchette

Bibliographic record

VenueAIP conference proceedings · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topicsolar cell performance optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersInstitut National des Sciences Appliquées de LyonCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesUniversité Grenoble AlpesUniversité de SherbrookeMitacsUniversité de LyonIndian National Science Academy
KeywordsMicrocellOpticsParabolic troughMolding (decorative)Wedge (geometry)Process (computing)Computer scienceTrough (economics)Materials sciencePhysicsMechanical engineeringEngineeringTelecommunicationsElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trough-Lens-Cone PV, or TLC, is a CPV module architecture that uses three-stage optics to enable high concentration at low cost. A trough mirror concentrates ∼40X on one axis onto a long, narrow module. The module cover has linear lenses on front that reconcentrate ∼10X on a second axis, producing a series of narrow ∼400X focal lines. The final optical stage is an array of CPC (compound-parabolic-curve) cones that raise the concentration to ∼1500X. A receiver has an array of microcells in parallel to handle the trough’s uneven concentration, and each cone funnels light to a microcell. Suitable parabolic troughs are already low cost, the lenses are designed to be roll-formed at very low cost, and the arrays of microcells can be assembled at low cost. However, forming the arrays of tiny cones is a potential obstacle. This paper describes criteria that the cones should meet, the challenges of producing suitable cones, the proposed cone-molding process, and first results from proof-of-concept prototyping of the proposed process.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIP conference proceedingsSame topicsolar cell performance optimizationFrench-language works237,207