MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392579829 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu24-9519

Rethinking operational VGOS observations

2024· preprint· en· W4392579829 on OpenAlexaff
Matthias Schartner, Bill Petrachenko, P. Charlot, Minghui Xu, A. Collioud, Hana Krásná, Soja Benedikt

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Systems and Laser Technology
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The VLBI Global Observing System (VGOS) was created to meet the ambitious requirements set by the Global Geodetic Observing System (GGOS). Its primary objective is achieving millimeter-level precision while maintaining continuous 24/7 observations. Currently, both aims remain unfulfilled. Simultaneously, new requirements, such as the development of a dedicated VGOS Celestial Reference Frame (CRF), have emerged. Thus, a reevaluation of our current VGOS observational framework is necessary to reach the VGOS goals.This study addresses three pivotal challenges within VGOS: attaining millimeter precision, providing observations for a CRF, and achieving uninterrupted 24/7 observations. Each of these topics demand a readjustment of our current observation scheduling methodology.Based on insight from VGOS R&D sessions, this work discusses potential approaches to meet the requisite precision through shorter, signal-to-noise-driven observations. Additionally, it explores the combination of this methodology with source-based scheduling to facilitate the creation of essential observations for establishing a dedicated VGOS CRF. Finally, it addresses the issue of reaching 24/7 observations, currently limited by data transfer and correlation capacities. To overcome this, a potential solution involves a significant reduction in the recorded data volume per session by temporarily thinning out the schedule. Thus, it comes with a trade-off in precision. This concept might be seen as a paradigm shift in VLBI observations, traditionally striving for the highest precision possible, which we believe is worth being discussed. Based on observation statistics and Monte-Carlo simulations, we will elaborate on the expected impact of this approach. 

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptical Systems and Laser TechnologyFrench-language works237,207