Review of Current FFAG Lattice Studies in North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There has been a revival of interest in the use of fixed field alternating gradient accelerators (FFAGs) for many applications, including muon accelerators, high-intensity proton sources, and medical applications.The original FFAGs, and those recently built in Japan, have been based on a so-called scaling FFAG design, for which tunes are constant and the behavior in phase space is independent of energy with the exception of a scaling factor.Activity in the US and Canada has instead mostly focused on nonscaling designs, which, while having the large energy acceptance that characterizes an FFAG, do not obey the scaling relations of the scaling FFAG.Most of these designs have been based on magnets with a linear midplane field profile.A great deal of analysis, both theoretically and numerically, has occurred on these designs, and they are very well understood at this point.Some more recent work has occurred on designs with a nonlinear field profile.Since no non-scaling FFAG has ever been built, there is interest in building a small model which would accelerate electrons and demonstrate our understanding of non-scaling FFAG design.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.003 |
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".