MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030593462 · doi:10.1063/1.1150458

Pulsed field ionization-photoion spectroscopy using two-bunch synchrotron radiation: Time-of-flight selection scheme

2000· article· en· W2030593462 on OpenAlexaff
G. K. Jarvis, R. C. Shiell, J. W. Hepburn, Yang Song, C. Y. Ng

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Scientific Instruments · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSpectroscopy and Laser Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSynchrotron radiationSynchrotronIonizationDetectorIonPhysicsOpticsMaterials scienceAtomic physicsIon beamPhotoemission spectroscopyPhotoionizationBeam (structure)OptoelectronicsX-ray photoelectron spectroscopyNuclear magnetic resonance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have demonstrated that the time-of-flight (TOF) selection method for pulsed field ionization (PFI) photoelectron detection [Jarvis et al., Rev. Sci. Instrum. 70, 2615 (1999)] can also be applied for the detection of PFI-photoions (PFI-PIs) using the two-bunch synchrotron radiation at the Advanced Light Source. By employing the supersonic beam technique to lower the translational temperature of the sample gas, we show that background prompt ions formed in direct and spontaneous autoionization processes arrive at the ion detector in a pattern similar to that of the vacuum ultraviolet light bunches. The PFI-PIs formed at dark gaps can be designed to arrive at the detector in between adjacent prompt ion peaks, enabling the gating of the PFI-PI signal with only minor contamination from background prompt ions. This experiment has revealed important considerations for the design of a general TOF selection scheme for PFI-PI detection using synchrotron radiation.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.976

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.276 · 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.

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

Citations11
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Scientific InstrumentsSame topicSpectroscopy and Laser ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207