MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387300059 · doi:10.1117/12.2677896

The MAPS adaptive secondary mirror: first light, laboratory work, and achievements

2023· article· en· W4387300059 on OpenAlexaff
Jess A. Johnson, Amali Vaz, Manny Montoya, Narsireddy Anugu, Cameron Ard, Jared Carlson, Kimberly Chapman, Olivier Durney, C. Fellows, Andrew Gardner, Olivier Guyon, Buell T. Jannuzi, Ron Jones, Craig Kulesa, Joseph D. Long, Eden McEwen, Jared R. Males, Emily Mailhot, Jorge Sánchez, Surresh Sivanandam, Robin Swanson, Jacob Taylor, Dan Vargas, Grant West, Jennifer Patience, Katie M. Morzinski

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdaptive optics and wavefront sensing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork (physics)Computer scienceEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The MMT Adaptive Optics exoPlanet Characterization System (MAPS) is a comprehensive update to the first generation MMT adaptive optics system (MMTAO), designed to produce a facility class suite of instruments whose purpose is to image nearby exoplanets. The system’s adaptive secondary mirror (ASM), although comprised in part of legacy components from the MMTAO ASM, represents a major leap forward in design, structure and function. The subject of this paper is the design, operation, achievements and technical issues of the MAPS adaptive secondary mirror. We discuss laboratory preparation for on-sky engineering runs, the results of those runs and the issues we discovered, what we learned about those issues in a follow up period of laboratory work, and the steps we are taking to mitigate them.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdaptive optics and wavefront sensingFrench-language works237,207