MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Quasimonoenergetic Electron Beams with Relativistic Energies and Ultrashort Duration from Laser-Solid Interactions at 0.5 kHz

2009· article· en· W1975507122 on OpenAlexaff
Aghapi Mordovanakis, James Easter, N. M. Naumova, Konstantin Popov, P. E. Masson-Laborde, Bixue Hou, И. В. Соколов, G. Mourou, Igor V. Glazyrin, W. Rozmus, V. Yu. Bychenkov, J. Nees, K. Krushelnick

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLaser-Plasma Interactions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAtomic physicsElectronLaserCollimated lightPlasmaPulse durationDistribution functionRelativistic electron beamSpecular reflectionCathode rayOpticsNuclear physicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate the production of electron beams from the interaction of relativistically-intense laser pulses with a solid-density SiO(2) target in a regime where the laser pulse energy is approximately mJ and the repetition rate approximately kHz. The electron beam spatial distribution and spectrum were investigated as a function of the plasma scale length, which was varied by deliberately introducing a moderate-intensity prepulse. At the optimum scale length of lambda/2, the electrons are emitted in a collimated beam having a quasimonoenergetic distribution that peaked at approximately 0.8 MeV. A highly reproducible structure in the spatial distribution exhibits an evacuation of electrons along the laser specular direction and suggests that the electron beam duration is comparable to that of the laser pulse. Particle-in-cell simulations which are in good agreement with the experimental results offer insights on the acceleration mechanism by the laser field.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.267
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 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

Citations77
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicLaser-Plasma Interactions and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207