MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036761224 · doi:10.1063/1.1357221

Electron kinetic simulations of solid density Al plasmas produced by intense subpicosecond laser pulses. I. Ionization dynamics in 30 femtosecond pulses

2001· article· en· W2036761224 on OpenAlexaff
S. Ethier, J. P. Matte

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics of Plasmas · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser-induced spectroscopy and plasma
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtomic physicsPhysicsIonizationPlasmaFemtosecondElectronExcited stateExcitationIonKinetic energyElectron densityThermalisationLaserElectron temperatureDistribution functionPulse (music)Optics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The interaction of a 1018 W/cm2, 30 fs laser pulse with solid Al was simulated with the electron kinetic code “FPI” [J. P. Matte et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 1208 (1994)] in which an improved average ion module was fully coupled to the electron kinetics. It includes electron impact ionization and excitation and their inverse processes: collisional recombination and de-excitation; as well as radiative decay and pressure ionization. We compare to runs without the inverse processes, and also without atomic physics (with 〈Z〉 set to 11). Atomic physics strongly affects the energy balance and the shape of the distribution function. Line radiation is mostly due to three body recombination into excited states after the peak of the pulse, as the plasma cools down. Despite the atomic processes and the high density, strongly non-Maxwellian distribution functions were obtained due to very steep temperature gradients and strong collisional heating, at the peak of the pulse. However, after the pulse, there is a very rapid thermalization of the electron distribution to which inverse processes strongly contribute.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations15
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics of PlasmasSame topicLaser-induced spectroscopy and plasmaFrench-language works237,207