MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362519067 · doi:10.1117/1.oe.62.3.035108

Lens design distortion management using orthogonal polynomial functions

2023· article· en· W4362519067 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOptical Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Measurement and Metrology Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistortion (music)Surface (topology)Ray tracing (physics)Orthogonal polynomialsLens (geology)PolynomialOpticsComputer scienceGaussAlgorithmMathematicsMathematical analysisPhysicsGeometryTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose the use of slope orthogonal polynomials as a tool to manage distortion. The object-to-image mapping of the whole optical system is reduced to a single refracting surface, which reproduces the same lens mapping function (LMF) as the original optical system. Using slope orthogonal polynomials to describe this LMF equivalent surface, the orthogonal properties of the polynomial can be leveraged for efficient use of ray tracing by relating coordinates mapping to a surface gradient. We demonstrate that this distortion measurement can be linked to a physical surface aspherical departure in the case of a double Gauss objective. This relationship can be established for any surfaces, after a calibration step. We also show that this same relationship can be used to obtain a target LMF by setting a precomputed aspherical surface departure on a given surface.

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.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.865
Threshold uncertainty score0.635

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.193 · 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