International optical design conference 2006 : 4-8 June 2006, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
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
[Show Abstracts] To view an abstract for an individual paper, or place a paper order, click the paper title. 634201 The first optical convention (in English): the 1905 Optical Convention in London, England Kevin P. Thompson 634202 Double Gauss lens design: a review of some classics Reginald P. Jonas, Michael D. Thorpe 634203 Twenty-first century optical tolerancing: a look at the past and improvements for the future Richard N. Youngworth 634204 Alignment of optical systems Robert E. Parks 634205 Use of an application programming interface (API) to allow non-optical designers to perform specific optical evaluations Mark C. Sanson 634206 The current state of the international standard for exchange of optical data in electronic form Prudence M. J. H. Wormell 634207 Wavefront correction using micromirror arrays: comparing the efficacy of tip-tilt-piston and piston-only micromirror arrays William C. Sweatt, Olga B. Spahn, William D. Cowan, David V. Wick 634208 Interpretation of pupil aberrations in imaging systems Jose Sasian 634209 General sine condition for plane-symmetric imaging systems and some example aplanatic designs Chunyu Zhao 63420A Third-order aberrations of an AGRIN thin lens as a function of the shape and conjugate variables Jose A. Diaz, Carles Pizarro, Josep Arasa.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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