A new x-ray optics laboratory (XROL) at the ALS: mission, arrangement, metrology capabilities, performance, and future plans
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The X-Ray Optics Laboratory (XROL) at the Advanced Light Source (ALS), a unique optical metrology lab, has been recently moved to a new, dedicated clean-room facility that provides improved environmental and instrumental conditions vitally required for high accuracy metrology with state-of-the-art X-ray optics. Besides the ALS, the XROL serves several DOE labs that lack dedicated on-site optical metrology capabilities, including the Linac Coherent Light Source (LCLS) at SLAC and LBNL’s Center for X-Ray Optics (CXRO). The major role of XROL is to proactively support the development and optimal beamline use of x-ray optics. The application of different instruments available in the lab enables separate, often complementary, investigations and addresses of different potential sources of error affecting beamline performance. At the beamline, all the perturbations combine to produce a cumulative effect on the performance of the optic that makes it difficult to optimize the optic's operational performance. Ex situ metrology allows us to address the majority of the problems before the installation of the optic at a beamline, and to provide feedback on design and guidelines for the best usage of optics. We will review the ALS XROL mission, lab design and arrangement, ex situ metrology capabilities and performance, as well as the future plans for instrumentation upgrades. The discussion will be illustrated with the results of a broad spectrum of measurements of x-ray optics and optical systems performed at the XROL.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it