MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W16352413 · doi:10.1016/j.jpba.2005.11.007

Status of the SPL at CERN

2007· article· en· W16352413 on OpenAlexfundno aff
R. Garoby

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSuperconducting Materials and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFermilabBhabha Atomic Research CentreDeutsches Elektronen-SynchrotronTRIUMF
KeywordsLarge Hadron ColliderUpgradePhysicsNuclear physicsSuper Proton SynchrotronBooster (rocketry)LuminosityLinear particle acceleratorNuclear engineeringBeam (structure)EngineeringComputer scienceOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The construction of the Large Hadron Collider at CERN is in its final phase, and commissioning with beam is scheduled to begin before the end of 2007. It is now time to prepare for increasing as much as possible the performance of this unique instrument to maximize the benefits for physics. An essential part of the proposed luminosity upgrade plan is the replacement of the CERN PS and its injectors by a 50 GeV proton synchrotron (PS2) and a 4 GeV superconducting linac (SPL). The design of the SPL has recently been updated and the optimization of its high-energy part will continue until ~2010. For the foreseen luminosity upgrade of the LHC a low-power version of the SPL (LP-SPL) is under study, which can be upgraded to a multi-megawatt machine providing beam to high-power proton users such as neutrino facilities and/or radio-active beam facilities. The construction start of the low-energy normal conducting SPL front-end, the 160 MeV "Linac4", is scheduled for January 2008, with the goal of being operational as injector for the PS Booster (PSB) at the beginning of 2012. The design status of Linac4, LP-SPL, and SPL are described, as well as their foreseen implementation into the CERN proton injector chain.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.139

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.043

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.282 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical AnalysisSame topicSuperconducting Materials and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207