MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117619386 · doi:10.1109/pac.1997.749559

Summary of the single-beam collective effects in the LHC

2002· article· en· W2117619386 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the 1997 Particle Accelerator Conference (Cat. No.97CH36167) · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicParticle Accelerators and Free-Electron Lasers
Canadian institutionsTRIUMF
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLarge Hadron ColliderBunchesPhysicsElectrical impedanceLimit (mathematics)Beam (structure)Landau dampingInstabilityParticle physicsMechanicsNuclear physicsPlasmaOpticsQuantum mechanicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Single beam collective effects can limit the performance of the LHC and, together with parasitic losses, impose constraints on the design of the components of the LHC vacuum system. Because of the large number of bunches in the LHC, coherent losses and multibunch instability rise times generated by the impedance items can be rather large. For example, the vacuum chambers of the main experiments can lead to large parasitic losses and a continuous feedback from the impedance calculations during their design process is desirable. We first summarise the current status of the impedance model for the LHC and estimate rise times and threshold currents for different instabilities. In a second step, we discuss possibilities of controlling these instabilities, using feedback systems and Landau damping.

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.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.969

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.179 · 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