Comparative spectra and efficiencies of ions laser-accelerated forward from the front and rear surfaces of thin solid foils
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
The maximum energy of protons that are accelerated forward by high-intensity, short-pulse lasers from either the front or rear surfaces of thin metal foils is compared for a large range of laser intensities and pulse durations. In the regime of moderately long laser pulse durations (300–850fs), and for high laser intensities [(1−6)×1019W∕cm2], rear-surface acceleration is shown experimentally to produce higher energy particles with smaller divergence and a higher efficiency than front-surface acceleration. For similar laser pulse durations but for lower laser intensities (2×1018Wcm−2), the same conclusion is reached from direct proton radiography of the electric fields associated with proton acceleration from the rear surface. For shorter (30–100fs) or longer (1–10ps) laser pulses, the same predominance of rear-surface acceleration in producing the highest energy protons is suggested by simulations and by comparison of analytical models with measured values. For this purpose, we have revised our previous analytical model of rear-surface acceleration [J. Fuchs et al., Nat. Phys. 2, 48 (2006)] to adapt it to the very short pulse durations. Finally, it appears, for the explored parameters, that rear-surface acceleration is the dominant mechanism.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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