MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1941800954 · doi:10.1139/p11-149

K-shell ionization cross sections of K and L<sub>α</sub> X-ray production cross sections of I by 10–30 keV electron impact

2012· article· en· W1941800954 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Y. Wu, Zhu An, Y.M. Duan, Mengping Liu, X.P. Ouyang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicX-ray Spectroscopy and Fluorescence Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChina Institute of Atomic EnergySichuan UniversityInternational Atomic Energy AgencyNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBremsstrahlungPhysicsElectronIonizationElectron shellAtomic physicsL-shellElectron scatteringElectron ionizationScatteringShell (structure)X-raySpectral linePhotonCarbon fibersMonte Carlo methodNuclear physicsIonOpticsMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The absolute K-shell ionization cross sections of K and L α X-ray production cross sections of I by 10–30 keV electron impact have been measured. The target was prepared by evaporating a thin film of compound KI to a thick pure carbon substrate. The effects of multiple scattering of electrons penetrating the target films, electrons reflected from the thick pure carbon substrates and bremsstrahlung photons produced when incident electrons impacted on the targets were corrected by using the Monte Carlo method. For K K-shell and I L-shell X-ray characteristic peaks, the spectra were fitted using the spectrum-fitting program ALLFIT to extract the K α and K β peak counts more accurately for element K, and L α peak counts for element I. The experimental results were compared with some theoretical results developed recently and available experimental data from the literature. The experimental data for I L-shell X-ray production cross sections by 10–30 keV electron impact are given here for the first time.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.440
Threshold uncertainty score0.661

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations10
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicX-ray Spectroscopy and Fluorescence AnalysisFrench-language works237,207