Continuous-scan capability at SSRL and applications to X-ray diffraction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Typical X-ray diffraction measurements are made by moving a detector to discrete positions in space and then measuring the signal at each stationary position. This step-scanning method can be time-consuming, and may induce vibrations in the measurement system when the motors are accelerated and decelerated at each position. Furthermore, diffraction information between the data points may be missed unless a fine step-scanning is used, which further increases the total measurement time. To utilize beam time efficiently, the motor acceleration and deceleration time should be minimized, and the signal-to-noise ratio should be maximized. To accomplish this, an integrated continuous-scan system was developed at the Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lightsource (SSRL). The continuous-scan system uses an in-house integrated motor controller system and counter/timer electronics. SPEC software is used to control both the hardware and data acquisition systems. The time efficiency and repeatability of the continuous-scan system were tested using X-ray diffraction from a ZnO powder and compared with the step-scan technique. Advantages and limitations of the continuous-scan system and a demonstration of variable-velocity continuous scan 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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".