MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160056822 · doi:10.1088/1367-2630/11/4/043033

Stability criteria for a passive electrostatic non-relativistic charged particle storage device

2009· article· en· W2160056822 on OpenAlexaff
P. R. Hammond, T J Reddish, Aaron Alderman, D R Tessier, F H Read

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Journal of Physics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsStorage ringCharged particleElectronStability (learning theory)Atomic physicsSpectrometerParticle (ecology)Context (archaeology)Track (disk drive)Energy (signal processing)Computational physicsOpticsIonNuclear physicsQuantum mechanicsBeam (structure)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The general conditions are determined for stable multiple orbits of non-relativistic charged particles in a race-track-shaped optical system.These conditions are then considered in the context of an electrostatic storage ring consisting of two 180 • hemispherical deflector analysers connected by two separate sets of cylindrical lenses.The race-track configuration of this type has already been constructed and demonstrated to achieve storage of low-energy (tens of electronvolts) electrons (Tessier et al 2007 Phys.Rev. Lett.99 253201).Incorporating the aberrations of the energy-dispersive electrostatic prisms is found to modify and restrict the general stability conditions.This modified formal matrix theory and the results of charged particle simulations described in this study are in excellent agreement with the observed experimental operating conditions for this electron recycling spectrometer.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.324
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew Journal of PhysicsSame topicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207