Effects of emitted electron temperature on the plasma sheath
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has long been known that electron emission from a surface significantly affects the sheath surrounding that surface. Typical fluid theory of a planar sheath with emitted electrons assumes that the plasma electrons follow the Boltzmann relation and the emitted electrons are emitted with zero energy and predicts a potential drop of 1.03Te/e across the sheath in the floating condition. By considering the modified velocity distribution function caused by plasma electrons lost to the wall and the half-Maxwellian distribution of the emitted electrons, it is shown that ratio of plasma electron temperature to emitted electron temperature significantly affects the sheath potential when the plasma electron temperature is within an order of magnitude of the emitted electron temperature. When the plasma electron temperature equals the emitted electron temperature the emissive sheath potential goes to zero. One dimensional particle-in-cell simulations corroborate the predictions made by this theory. The effects of the addition of a monoenergetic electron beam to the Maxwellian plasma electrons were explored, showing that the emissive sheath potential is close to the beam energy only when the emitted electron flux is less than the beam flux.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".