Dual-beam laser interferometer for the accurate determination of rocking motion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most primary accelerometer calibrations, or absolute calibrations, are currently performed using laser interferometry under the guideline of the international standard (ISO 16063-11, 1999). Due to rocking motion of vibration shakers, however, the measured accelerometer sensitivities at different laser incidence points can vary for up to a few percent. For the accurate determination of rocking motion on the effect of calibration results, a dual-beam laser interferometer was developed at National Research Council Canada. This paper describes the method and apparatus for simultaneous measurements of displacement amplitudes and its distribution along a straight line using a dual-beam laser interferometer. The interferometer directs two beams that are incident at distinct points on a moving surface. A separation distance between the two sensing spots on the moving surface is provided. In the present setup, the separation distance is adjustable along a straight line. This feature allows the interferometer to measure the displacement distribution along a line. To reduce the measurement uncertainty a model-based estimation is used to accurately determine the displacement amplitudes from the current outputs of photo diodes. This paper also presents the measurement results showing the difference of displacement amplitudes due to rocking motion. The system may also be used for direct quantitative study of moving surface deformation during vibration.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".