MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141091266 · doi:10.1109/pac.1989.73393

Stability of beams hollow in longitudinal phase space

2003· article· en· W2141091266 on OpenAlexaff
R. Baartman, F.W. Jones, Shane Koscielniak, G. H. Mackenzie

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicParticle accelerators and beam dynamics
Canadian institutionsTRIUMF
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpace chargeOrbit (dynamics)Charge (physics)DipoleBeam (structure)Phase (matter)Phase spacePhysicsInstabilityStability (learning theory)Point (geometry)Space (punctuation)Distribution (mathematics)Charge densityComputational physicsMechanicsAerospace engineeringOpticsComputer scienceMathematicsMathematical analysisQuantum mechanicsGeometryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intense beams, approximately 100 mu A, can be accumulated in storage rings by means of charge exchange injection together with a sweep of the closed orbit and/or incoming beam parameters. Such 'painting' schemes can result in 6-D charge distributions peaked at the synchronous orbit and stable under space charge forces. Some of these schemes, however, may produce, at some point during the procedure, charge distributions that are hollow in longitudinal phase space. Under these conditions tracking simulations incorporating longitudinal space charge effects suggest that a dipole instability may develop. The development time depends on the total charge and its distribution. It is found that hollow beams may be practicable provided that the total charge is less than a critical value. Initial growth rates are given.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">&gt;</ETX>

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.757
Threshold uncertainty score0.259

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicParticle accelerators and beam dynamicsFrench-language works237,207