MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2183790439

Extruded Aluminum Vacuum Chambers for Insertion Devices

2011· article· en· W2183790439 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
P.K. Den Hartog, G. Wiemerslage, E. M. Trakhtenberg

Bibliographic record

VenuePresented at · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicParticle Accelerators and Free-Electron Lasers
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceUndulatorSynchrotron radiationSynchrotronVacuum chamberPolishingAluminiumExtrusionOpticsVacuum packingOptoelectronicsComposite materialRadiationMechanical engineeringPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extruded aluminum vacuum chambers are commonly used in the storage rings of synchrotron facilities. For 18 years the APS has designed and fabricated vacuum chambers made from extruded aluminum for use with insertion devices at the APS and for use at other facilities including BESSY II, the Swiss Light Source (SLS), the Canadian Light Source (CLS), the TESLA Test Facility (TTF), and the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF). Most recently extruded aluminum chambers were developed for LCLS with a 0.5-mm wall thickness along the entire 3.8-meter length. Surface roughness for the LCLS vacuum chamber interior was reduced, on average, to less than 300 nm through an abrasive flow polishing technique. Currently under development is an extruded aluminum chamber for the superconducting undulator at the APS. So far, 120 vacuum chambers have been produced with these methods. Results of the development, construction, and manufacturing of extruded aluminum vacuum chambers with small vertical apertures and thin walls are presented. The design, technological challenges, and positive and negative experiences are discussed.

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)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePresented atSame topicParticle Accelerators and Free-Electron LasersFrench-language works237,207