MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2560303010 · doi:10.1063/1.4971317

Retarding field analyzer for the EAST plasma boundary

2016· article· en· W2560303010 on OpenAlexaff
Y. L. Li, Guosheng Xu, C. Xiao, Huiqian Wang, N. Yan, Baonian Wan, Liang Chen, Y L Liu, Hui Zhang, Wei Zhang, Liang Wang, G.H. Hu, Ruihuan Chen, J.C. Xu, Yunguan Ye, Jie Li

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Scientific Instruments · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsLangmuir probeElectron temperaturePlasmaElectronAtomic physicsPlasma diagnosticsMaterials scienceTokamakIonReciprocating motionSpectrum analyzerElectron densityPhysicsOpticsNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A novel bi-directional Retarding Field Analyzer (RFA) probe has been installed on a fast reciprocating drive system on the Experimental Advanced Superconducting Tokamak (EAST) to measure the ion temperature and fast electron fluxes. A Langmuir probe assembly was added on the top of the RFA head to control the RFA position relative to the last closed flux surface and to have a possibility to measure the electron density and temperature as well. Except the ion temperature, the fast electron fluxes from both ion and electron drift sides have been measured during lower hybrid current drive. The RFA probe has been also used to measure the fast electrons associated with edge localized modes (ELMs), indicating their substantial presence in the scrape-off-layer plasma of EAST.

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)0.001
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 score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Scientific InstrumentsSame topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207