MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4289749440 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1807.09179

Maunakea Spectroscopic Explorer Low Moderate Resolution Spectrograph\n Conceptual Design

2018· preprint· en· W4289749440 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Patrick Caillier, Will Saunders, Pierre-Henri Carton, Florence Laurent, Jean-Emmanuel Migniau, A. Pécontal, Johan Richard, Christophe Yèche

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstronomy and Astrophysical Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpectrographPhysicsTelescopeGalaxyConceptual designSpectral resolutionAstronomyRangingStarsOpticsAstrophysicsTelecommunicationsSpectral lineComputer scienceMechanical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Maunakea Spectroscopic Explorer (MSE) Project is a planned replacement\nfor the existing 3.6-m Canada France Hawaii Telescope (CFHT) into a 10-m class\ndedicated wide field highly multiplexed fibre fed spectroscopic facility. MSE\nseeks to tackle basic science questions ranging from the origin of stars and\nstellar systems, Galaxy archaeology at early times, galaxy evolution across\ncosmic time, to cosmology and the nature of dark matter and dark energy. MSE\nwill be a primary follow-up facility for many key future photometric and\nastrometric surveys, as well as a major component in the study of the\nmulti-wavelength Universe. The MSE is based on a prime focus telescope concept\nwhich illuminate 3200 fibres or more. These fibres are feeding a Low Moderate\nResolution (LMR) spectrograph and a High Resolution (HR). The LMR will provide\n2 resolution modes at R>2500 and R>5000 on a wavelength range of 360 to 950 nm\nand a resolution of R>3000 on the 950 nm to 1300 nm bandwidth. Possibly the H\nband will be also covered by a second NIR mode from ranging from 1450 to 1780\nnm. The HR will have a resolution of R>39000 on the 360 to 600 nm wavelength\nrange and R>20000 on the 600 to 900 nm bandwidth. This paper presents the LMR\ndesign after its Conceptual Design Review held in June 2017. It focuses on the\ngeneral concept, optical and mechanical design of the instrument. It describes\nthe associated preliminary expected performances especially concerning optical\nand thermal performances.\n

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.139

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.027

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.128 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)→Same topicAstronomy and Astrophysical Research→French-language works237,207→