MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101531048 · doi:10.1063/1.2187867

Gamma-Ray Spectroscopy at TRIUMF-ISAC

2006· article· en· W2101531048 on OpenAlexafffund
P. E. Garrett

Bibliographic record

VenueAIP conference proceedings · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear physics research studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersVetenskapsrådetLawrence Livermore National LaboratoryEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilTRIUMFU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsSpectrometerPhysicsDetectorNuclear physicsScintillatorSemiconductor detectorGermaniumElectronOpticsSiliconOptoelectronics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 8π spectrometer at TRIUMF‐ISAC consists of 20 Compton‐suppressed germanium detectors and various auxiliary devices. The Ge array, once used for studies of nuclei at high angular momentum, has been transformed into the world’s most powerful device dedicated to radioactive‐decay studies. Many improvements in the spectrometer have been made, including a high‐throughput data acquisition system, installation of a moving tape collector, incorporation of an array of 20 plastic scintillators for β‐particle tagging, 5 Si(Li) detectors for conversion electrons, and 10 BaF2 detectors for fast‐lifetime measurements. Experiments can be performed where data from all detectors are collected simultaneously, resulting in a very detailed view of the nucleus through radioactive decay. A number of experimental programmes have been launched that take advantage of the versatility of the spectrometer, and the intense beams available at TRIUMF‐ISAC.

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)0.004
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.005

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIP conference proceedingsSame topicNuclear physics research studiesFrench-language works237,207