Fluorescence induced by radioluminescence and applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two processes explain radioluminescence of organic and inorganic materials. Exposition of organic materials to ionizing particles leads to the excitation of the molecules of the matrix. The relaxation leads to photon emission. In the case of the inorganic materials a self-trapped exciton (STE) propagates in the crystal until it reaches and excites an impurity; the relaxation of this impurity may be radiative. We observed that lanthanides (ErIV or NdIV) doped materials (porous or ED2 glasses) show some characteristic emission rays. The spectra are quite similar to the expected ones for inorganic materials, while these materials are organic. We developed a model explaining how the radioluminescence of the organic materials excites the lanthanide ions, and then the observed radioluminescence emission spectra can be explained by the Judd-Ofelt theory. Several materials have been studied: erbium doped porous glass (ErIV:PG), neodymium doped ED2 glass (NdIV:ED2), and also a sample of titan sapphire (Ti:Sa) as a comparison sample for inorganic materials. These samples have been exposed to H2+, 4He++, 12C++ ions accelerated up to 4.1 MeV with a Van de Graaff accelerator. The emission spectra have been measured and a study of the luminescence lifetime of the material has been made. Luminescence lifetime of the characteristic rays is dependent on the radiation dose. These observations allow us to conclude that the lanthanide ions are well excited by the standard radioluminescence of the undoped material. Also, studies have been made as a function of the deposited energy to investigate the potential applications. All these results will be presented and discuted.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".