MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Super Interferometric Range Resolution

2023· article· en· W4385492139 on OpenAlexafffund
John C. Howell, Andrew N. Jordan, Barbara Šoda, Achim Kempf

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Optical Sensing Technologies
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
FundersAustralian Research CouncilOntario Ministry of Economic Development and InnovationMinistero dello Sviluppo EconomicoInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueInnovation, Science and Economic Development CanadaGovernment of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaChapman University
KeywordsPhysicsResolution (logic)InterferometryOpticsRange (aeronautics)AmplitudeBandwidth (computing)Interference (communication)Limit (mathematics)Measure (data warehouse)Rayleigh scatteringFigure of meritDynamic rangeComputer scienceMathematical analysisTelecommunicationsMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We probe the fundamental underpinnings of range resolution in coherent remote sensing. We use a novel class of self-referential interference functions to show that we can greatly improve upon currently accepted bounds for range resolution. We consider the range resolution problem from the perspective of single-parameter estimation of amplitude versus the traditional temporally resolved paradigm. We define two figures of merit: (i) the minimum resolvable distance between two depths and (ii) for temporally subresolved peaks, the depth resolution between the objects. We experimentally demonstrate that our system can resolve two depths greater than 100× the inverse bandwidth and measure the distance between two objects to approximately 20 μm (35 000 times smaller than the Rayleigh-resolved limit) for temporally subresolved objects using frequencies less than 120 MHz radio waves.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations19
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicAdvanced Optical Sensing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207