MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2482075143 · doi:10.1109/tns.2016.2541692

Predictions of Proton Cross-Section and Sensitive Thickness for Analog Single-Event Transients

2016· article· en· W2482075143 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
C. Weulersse, S. Morand, F. Miller, Thierry Carrière, R. Mangeret

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadiation Effects in Electronics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProtonCross section (physics)MetisComputer scienceHeavy ionExperimental dataSoftwarePhysicsNuclear physicsIonOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In linear devices, the strong impact of configuration on the SET characterization makes them very difficult to predict without using particle accelerators for each application. In this work, based on heavy ion data, we propose to simulate proton cross-sections using gateway tools such as SIMPA, PROFIT or the more recent METIS software we developed within Airbus Group. We review four linear devices and show more physically-motivated predictions for METIS than for the two former approaches. Especially, this engineering tool could be used in a reversed manner to determine the sensitive thickness based on the knowledge of both proton and heavy ion cross-sections.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.468
Threshold uncertainty score0.358

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Nuclear ScienceSame topicRadiation Effects in ElectronicsFrench-language works237,207