MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074424097 · doi:10.1139/v07-047

The Canadian Synchrotron Radiation Facility (CSRF) in Madison — Twenty-five years of soft X-ray research

2007· article· en· W2074424097 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
G. Michael Bancroft

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced X-ray Imaging Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSynchrotron radiationChemistryX-rayRadiationSynchrotronOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le premier faisceau lumineux de l'Institut canadien du rayonnement synchrotron (ICRS) a ete etabli en 1982, avec le support financier du CRSNG, en marge du synchrotron Tantalus a l'exterieur de Madison, Wisconsin, apres plusieurs annees de travaux a l'Universite de Western Ontario dans le but de creer un synchrotron au Canada. Sur une periode de vingt ans, l'ICRS a ete l'objet d'expansions qui ont porte a trois le nombre des faisceaux tres productifs de rayons X doux. La planification, le financement et la construction des trois faisceaux sont decrite dans ce travail et on decrit le travail devoue des scientifiques qui ont mis le laboratoire sur pieds ainsi que celui des personnes qui y ont realise d'importants travaux de recherches. L'ICRS a produit plus de 500 publications dans divers domaines scientifiques; ils provenaient de chercheurs attaches a onze universites canadiennes differentes. L'un des faisceaux de l'ICRS et plusieurs membres du personnel de l'ICRS ont ete transferes au Centre canadien de rayonnement synchrotron [Canadian Light Source (CLS)] a Saskatoon et l'ICRS sera formellement ferme en mars 2008.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score0.494

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0120.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0400.007

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.286 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicAdvanced X-ray Imaging TechniquesFrench-language works237,207