MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2532680686 · doi:10.1016/j.nima.2017.03.036

PENTrack—a simulation tool for ultracold neutrons, protons, and electrons in complex electromagnetic fields and geometries

2017· article· en· W2532680686 on OpenAlexaff
Wolfgang Schreyer, T. Kikawa, Martin J. Losekamm, S. Paul, R. Picker

Bibliographic record

VenueNuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A Accelerators Spectrometers Detectors and Associated Equipment · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Subatomic Physics Research
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityTRIUMF
FundersDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsUltracold neutronsPhysicsNeutronElectronComputational physicsUltracold atomNuclear physicsQuantum mechanicsQuantum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern precision experiments trapping low-energy particles require detailed simulations of particle trajectories and spin precession to determine systematic measurement limitations and apparatus deficiencies. We developed PENTrack, a tool that allows to simulate trajectories of ultracold neutrons and their decay products—protons and electrons—and the precession of their spins in complex geometries and electromagnetic fields. The interaction of ultracold neutrons with matter is implemented with the Fermi-potential formalism and diffuse scattering using Lambert and microroughness models. The results of several benchmark simulations agree with STARucn v1.2, uncovered several flaws in Geant4 v10.2.2, and agree with experimental data. Experiment geometry and electromagnetic fields can be imported from commercial computer-aided-design and finite-element software. All simulation parameters are defined in simple text files allowing quick changes. The simulation code is written in C++ and is freely available at github.com/wschreyer/PENTrack.git.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.613
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.352 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations11
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A Accelerators Spectrometers Detectors and Associated EquipmentSame topicAtomic and Subatomic Physics ResearchFrench-language works237,207