MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031185822 · doi:10.1063/1.2149370

Characterization of TRIUMF dc H− ion sources for enhanced brightness

2006· article· en· W2031185822 on OpenAlexafffund
Y. S. Hwang, G. Cojocaru, D. Yuan, M. McDonald, K. Jayamanna, Gon‐Ho Kim, G. Dutto

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Scientific Instruments · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPlasma Diagnostics and Applications
Canadian institutionsTRIUMF
FundersTRIUMF
KeywordsPlasmaLangmuir probeMaterials scienceThermal emittanceAtomic physicsIonBiasingBeam emittanceBeam (structure)Ion sourceIon beamPlasma parametersIon beam depositionPlasma diagnosticsVoltagePhysicsOpticsNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At TRIUMF, H− ion sources have been characterized on a teststand to improve the understanding of their performance. Measured beam characteristics such as current, emittance, and e∕H− ratio were correlated with source conditions as a function of relevant plasma parameters. Plasma densities, temperatures, and plasma potentials were measured with a Langmuir probe and correlated with beam properties for different confining magnetic fields and different values of arc power and gas pressure. The mechanism of beam extraction was studied by correlating plasma potential profiles with the corresponding plasma electrode bias voltages obtained from optimizing ion source outputs. Experiments with collar biasing and noble gas mixing were unsuccessful because of undesirable plasma potential profiles.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Bench or experimentallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Bench or experimentallow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

Citations11
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Scientific InstrumentsSame topicPlasma Diagnostics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207