MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097685651 · doi:10.1109/tns.2006.889641

Monte Carlo Simulation Study of the Characteristics of Xe-Ne Gas Mixtures as Detection Media in Gas Proportional Ionization Counters

2007· article· en· W2097685651 on OpenAlexaff
F.P. Santos, P.J.B.M. Rachinhas, F.I.G.M. Borges, A D Stauffer, C.A.N. Conde

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadiation Detection and Scintillator Technologies
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodPhysicsIonizationAnodeRADIUSCathodeAtomic physicsElectronAnalytical Chemistry (journal)IonNuclear physicsChemistryPhysical chemistryStatisticsElectrodeQuantum mechanicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A Monte Carlo simulation has been developed to investigate the performance of Xe-Ne filled proportional ionization counters, with a special interest on the intrinsic energy resolution R <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">int</sub> as a function of the Xe-Ne mixtures composition. The Monte Carlo simulation reproduces the growth of single-electron-initiated avalanches in cylindrical geometry, and the results for R <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">int</sub> are discussed in terms of the influence of the Penning ionization on the statistical parameter f characterizing the fluctuations of single-electron avalanches gain. The results for R <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">int</sub> , and f, as well as for the multiplication factor M, are calculated for each mixture as a function of the reduced anode voltage K=V/ln(c/a), where V is the voltage applied to the anode-wire and c/a is the cathode-to-anode radius ratio

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.317
Threshold uncertainty score0.302

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.246
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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Nuclear ScienceSame topicRadiation Detection and Scintillator TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207