MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312189953 · doi:10.1364/ao.477214

Optical filter wavefront distortion: out-of-band to in-band predictions and the effect of the illumination source bandwidth

2022· article· en· W4312189953 on OpenAlexaff
Graham Carlow, Jean‐Michel Guay, Alex Christou, Claude Montcalm, Adam Badeen, Brian Sullivan

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Optics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptical measurement and interference techniques
Canadian institutionsIridian Spectral Technologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpticsWavefrontBandwidth (computing)Optical filterWavelengthMaterials scienceFilter (signal processing)Distortion (music)PhysicsTelecommunicationsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The wavefront distortion (WFD) of a surface with an optical filter coating is ideally measured at the operating wavelength ( <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mi>λ</mml:mi> </mml:math> ) and angle of incidence ( <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mi>θ</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> ) of the filter. However, this is not always possible, requiring that the filter be measured at an out-of-band wavelength and angle (typically <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mi>λ</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mn>633</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> <mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">n</mml:mi> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> and <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mi>θ</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:msup> <mml:mn>0</mml:mn> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mo>∘</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> </mml:msup> </mml:math> ). Since the transmitted wavefront error (TWE) and reflected wavefront error (RWE) can depend on the measurement wavelength and angle, an out-of-band measurement may not give an accurate characterization of the WFD. In this paper, we will show how to predict the wavefront error (WFE) of an optical filter at the in-band wavelength and angle from a WFE measurement at an out-of-band wavelength and different angle. This method uses (i) the theoretical phase properties of the optical coating, (ii) the measured filter thickness uniformity, and (iii) the substrate’s WFE dependence versus the angle of incidence. Reasonably good agreement was achieved between the RWE measured directly at <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mi>λ</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mn>1050</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> <mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">n</mml:mi> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> ( <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mi>θ</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/> <mml:msup> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mn>45</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> <mml:mo>∘</mml:mo> </mml:msup> </mml:math> ) and the predicted RWE based on an RWE measurement at <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mi>λ</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mn>660</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> <mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">n</mml:mi> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> ( <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mi>θ</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:msup> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mn>0</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> <mml:mo>∘</mml:mo> </mml:msup> </mml:math> ). It is also shown through a series of TWE measurements using a light emitting diode (LED) and laser light sources that, if the TWE of a narrow bandpass filter (e.g., an 11 nm bandwidth centered at <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mi>λ</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mn>1050</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> <mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">n</mml:mi> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> ) is measured with a broadband LED source, the WFD can be dominated by the chromatic aberration of the wavefront measuring system—hence, a light source that has a bandwidth narrower than the optical filter bandwidth should be used.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.812
Threshold uncertainty score0.214

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied OpticsSame topicOptical measurement and interference techniquesFrench-language works237,207