Application of Imaging Systems to Characterization of Single-Event Effects in High-Energy Neutron Environments
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We use charge-coupled devices (CCDs) to characterise the single-event effect (SEE) inducing properties of high-energy neutron beams, including the spatial distribution of induced charge. Three representative CCD types are evaluated for this purpose. We study the significance of anti-blooming structures and pixel size. Anti-blooming structures are found to suppress event rates and corrupt event statistics. Devices without such structures are preferred and anti-blooming correction is performed in software. A CCD with 9 mum pixels is chosen for an Imaging SEE Monitor, which is currently being deployed in a variety of natural and synthetic neutron fields. Comparison is made between effects observed in neutron beams at LANSCE and TRIUMF accelerator facilities. Cross-sections for all events at the two facilities agree, providing independent confirmation of dosimetry. Cross-sections for more intense events disagree, with about a factor of 5 difference (LANSCE more effective) at 1 pC deposited charge. We attribute this discrepancy to the harder neutron spectrum at LANSCE, and conclude that predictions of SEE cross-sections in devices of interest, as measured at the two facilities, are liable to differ for this reason. Predictions of SEE rates in the field may also be in doubt. Charge collection measurements are recommended for adoption in test protocols for accelerated testing for neutron SEE
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it