MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040663662 · doi:10.1117/12.2062042

A new x-ray optics laboratory (XROL) at the ALS: mission, arrangement, metrology capabilities, performance, and future plans

2014· article· en· W2040663662 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Valeriy V. Yashchuk, Nikolay A. Artemiev, Ian Lacey, Wayne R. McKinney, H. A. Padmore

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScientific Measurement and Uncertainty Evaluation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersScience and Technology Facilities CouncilCanadian Light SourceU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsMetrologyX-ray opticsOpticsComputer scienceSystems engineeringPhysicsEngineeringX-ray

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.012
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.004

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations29
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicScientific Measurement and Uncertainty EvaluationFrench-language works237,207