MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145530932 · doi:10.1063/1.1344560

Edge flow measurements with Gundestrup probes

2001· article· en· W2145530932 on OpenAlexaff
J.P. Gunn, C. Boucher, P. Devynck, I. Ďuran, K. S. Dyabilin, J. Horáček, M. Hron, J. Ştöckel, G. Van Oost, H. van Goubergen, F. Žáček

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics of Plasmas · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsStreamlines, streaklines, and pathlinesPlasmaMach numberTokamakMagnetic fieldTorusPlasma diagnosticsComputational physicsKinetic energyMagnetohydrodynamicsAtomic physicsMechanicsNuclear physicsClassical mechanicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ion current collected by a probe in a magnetized plasma is sensitive to the angle between its surface and the flow streamlines. This intuitive concept is the basis of the Gundestrup probe, a polar array of planar collectors mounted around an insulating housing. Probe theory for measuring flows has been developed on two fronts: Recent kinetic and fluid models, reviewed here, give similar predictions for the collected current within the range of applicability of the model assumptions. A comparison with measurements by a rotating Mach probe in the CASTOR tokamak (Czech Academy of Sciences Torus) [J. Stöckel, J. Badalec, I. Ďuran et al., Plasma Phys. Controlled Fusion, 41, 577 (1999)] highlights the role of magnetization in ion collection at grazing angles of incidence between the probe surface and the magnetic field lines.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations62
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics of PlasmasSame topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207