Canadian banknotes to explore the phenomenon of diffraction
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Gratings and their well-known diffraction patterns are the basis of spectrometers to characterize light sources. Reciprocally, periodic peaks in the diffraction pattern of x-rays scattered by solids bring valuable information about the internal geometry of the crystal lattice, providing details about the arrangement of atoms in the solid. In both cases, periodic gratings are considered. What about non-periodic gratings? Is it possible to reconstruct any grating structure knowing its diffraction pattern? We answer this question by studying diffraction through the hologram hidden in a Canadian banknote. We measure the diffraction of near-infrared light to numerically reconstruct the grating structure using the Gerchberg–Saxton algorithm. We then compare this reconstructed grating structure with the picture of the grating structure observed with a phase-contrast microscope. Such an approach allows us to study diffraction from a perspective different from that usually taught at university.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it