MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063661101 · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.90.255002

Reduction of Electron Heating in the Low-Frequency Anomalous-Skin-Effect Regime

2003· article· en· W2063661101 on OpenAlexaff
Yu. Tyshetskiy, A. I. Smolyakov, Valery Godyak

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPlasma Diagnostics and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSkin effectPlasmaAtomic physicsElectromagnetic electron wavePhysicsElectronInductively coupled plasmaCollision frequencyAbsorption (acoustics)Magnetic fieldRadio frequencyRF power amplifierPlasma oscillationMaterials scienceOpticsOptoelectronics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is known that electron thermal motion in the anomalous-skin-effect regime of rf plasma discharges leads to enhancement of rf power absorption by plasma due to the resonant electron-wave interaction, which is a main mechanism of plasma heating in a typical inductively coupled plasma discharge. In this Letter we show, however, that the rf power absorption may be strongly reduced (compared to the Ohmic value) at low frequencies due to the electron thermal motion; an even further reduction occurs due to the nonlinear effects of the rf magnetic field. The absorption reduction occurs for $\ensuremath{\omega}<\ensuremath{\nu}<{v}_{\mathrm{t}\mathrm{h}}/\ensuremath{\delta}$ ($\ensuremath{\omega}$ is a driving frequency of rf wave, $\ensuremath{\nu}$ is the collision frequency, ${v}_{\mathrm{t}\mathrm{h}}$ is the thermal velocity, and $\ensuremath{\delta}$ is characteristic skin depth of the wave) and may be observed in low pressure inductive plasmas driven at low frequency and in a dc plasma with strong field inhomogeneity.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations29
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicPlasma Diagnostics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207