MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2516734214 · doi:10.1063/1.4962147

Optical fiber-based photocathode

2016· article· en· W2516734214 on OpenAlexaff
Albert Căsăndruc, Robert Bücker, Günther Kassier, R. J. Dwayne Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Letters · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNear-Field Optical Microscopy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotocathodeMaterials scienceOpticsOptical fiberFiberOptoelectronicsFaraday cupField electron emissionThermal emittanceElectronBeam (structure)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the design of a back-illuminated photocathode for electron diffraction experiments based on an optical fiber, and experimental characterization of emitted electron bunches. Excitation light is guided through the fiber into the experimental vacuum chamber, eliminating typical alignment difficulties between the emitter metal and the optical trigger and position instabilities, as well as providing reliable control of the laser spot size and profile. The in-vacuum fiber end is polished and coated with a 30 nm gold (Au) layer on top of 3 nm of chromium (Cr), which emits electrons by means of single-photon photoemission when femtosecond pulses in the near ultraviolet (257 nm) are fed into the fiber on the air side. The emission area can be adjusted to any value between a few nanometers (using tapered fibers) and the size of a multi-mode fiber core (100 μm or larger). In this proof-of-principle experiment, two different types of fibers were tested, with emission spot diameters of 50 μm and 100 μm, respectively. The normalized thermal electron beam emittance (TE) was measured by means of the aperture scan technique, and a TE of 4.0 π nm was measured for the smaller spot diameter. Straightforward enhancements to the concept allowed to demonstrate operation in an electric field environment of up to 7 MV/m.

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physics LettersSame topicNear-Field Optical MicroscopyFrench-language works237,207