MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000730958 · doi:10.1134/s1063780x09020032

Benchmarking of alternate theories for Stark broadening against experimental data from DIII-D diagnostics

2009· article· en· W2000730958 on OpenAlexaff
N.H. Brooks, S. Lisgo, Eugene Oks, D. Volodko, M. Groth, A.W. Leonard

Bibliographic record

VenuePlasma Physics Reports · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser-induced spectroscopy and plasma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
KeywordsStark effectBalmer seriesPhysicsAtomic physicsRydberg formulaPlasmaDIII-DDivertorHydrogen spectral seriesDoppler broadeningSpectral linePrincipal quantum numberLine (geometry)SpectroscopyIonizationHomogeneous broadeningTokamakEmission spectrumQuantumIonQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spectroscopy of high-n Balmer line transitions provides a means of measuring n e and T e in recombining plasmas [J. L. Terry et al., Phys. Plasmas 5, 1579 (1998)]. The relative intensities of Rydberg series lines near the ionization limit are a sensitive diagnostic of T e , for T e < 1.5 eV. Stark broadening of these same lines provides a measure of local n e and, with less accuracy, of T e . The accuracy of different theoretical models for Stark broadening [H.R. Griem, Spectral Line Broadening by Plasmas (Academic, New York, 1974); E. Oks, Stark Broadening of Hydrogen and Hydrogenlike Spectral Lines in Plasmas: The Physical Insight (Alpha Science International, Oxford, UK, 2006)] is evaluated by comparing values of n e and T e measured on DIII-D by divertor Thomson scattering (DTS) with those deduced from spectral profile analysis of Balmer series deuterium lines. In particular, the detailed dependence of line width on principal quantum number provides a sensitive metric for distinguishing which model best accords with experiment.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.271
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlasma Physics ReportsSame topicLaser-induced spectroscopy and plasmaFrench-language works237,207