Construction criteria and prototyping for the ISAC RFQ accelerator at TRIUMF
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ISAC RFQ consists of an 8 metre long 4-rod split ring structure resonating at 35 MHz. The rods are vaneshaped and are supported by 19 rings. The challenge of the mechanical design is the stringent, +/-0.08 mm, positioning tolerance on the four rod electrodes for 150 kW cw operation. A 1.2 metre long prototype with three full-scale modules, each comprising one ring and 40 cm of electrode, has already been built and successfully tested to fullpower. This enables us to complete the basic electrical and mechanical design for the final unit. The initial 7-ring portion of the final RFQ will be assembled first, together with an off-line source and a portion of the LEBT, so that RF parameters and beam dynamics behavior in the injection region can be tested as soon as possible. For the final RFQ the cross-section of the vacuum tank will be square, rather than circular. This will facilitate alignment of the modules and copper plating of the vacuum tank. The scope of the paper is to report the latest results from the full power tests on the prototype and to describe mechanical and RF design features including RF coupling, alignment philosophy and the copper plating technique.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".