MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297311930 · doi:10.1117/1.jatis.8.3.038007

AIROPA II: modeling instrumental aberrations for off-axis point spread functions in adaptive optics

2022· article· en· W4297311930 on OpenAlexaff
Anna Ciurlo, Paolo Turri, Gunther Witzel, Jessica R. Lu, Tuan Do, Breann Sitarski, Michael P. Fitzgerald, A. M. Ghez, C. Álvarez, Sean K. Terry, Greg Doppmann, James E. Lyke, Sam Ragland, R. Campbell, K. Matthews

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Astronomical Telescopes Instruments and Systems · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdaptive optics and wavefront sensing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptive opticsOpticsPoint (geometry)PhysicsComputer scienceMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Images obtained with single-conjugate adaptive optics (AO) show spatial variation of the point spread function (PSF) due to both atmospheric anisoplanatism and instrumental aberrations. The poor knowledge of the PSF across the field of view strongly impacts the ability to take full advantage of AO capabilities. The AIROPA project aims to model these PSF variations for the NIRC2 imager at the Keck Observatory. Here, we present the characterization of the instrumental phase aberrations over the entire NIRC2 field of view and we present a metric for quantifying the quality of the calibration, the fraction of variance unexplained (FVU). We used phase diversity measurements obtained on an artificial light source to characterize the variation of the aberrations across the field of view and their evolution with time. We find that there is a daily variation of the wavefront error (RMS of the residuals is 94 nm) common to the whole detector, but the differential aberrations across the field of view are very stable (RMS of the residuals between different epochs is 59 nm). This means that instrumental calibrations need to be monitored often only at the center of the detector, and the much more time-consuming variations across the field of view can be characterized less frequently (most likely when hardware upgrades happen). Furthermore, we tested AIROPA’s instrumental model through real data of the fiber images on the detector. We find that modeling the PSF variations across the field of view improves the FVU metric by 60% and reduces the detection of fake sources by 70%.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.221 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Astronomical Telescopes Instruments and SystemsSame topicAdaptive optics and wavefront sensingFrench-language works237,207