MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2577898578 · doi:10.1002/xrs.2736

Determination of optimal metallic secondary target thickness, collimation, and exposure parameters for X‐ray tube‐based polarized EDXRF

2017· article· en· W2577898578 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueX-Ray Spectrometry · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicX-ray Spectroscopy and Fluorescence Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMcMaster University Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCollimatorCollimated lightX-ray tubeMonte Carlo methodBeam (structure)Polarization (electrochemistry)Tube (container)OpticsDetectorMaterials sciencePhysicsChemistryMathematicsElectrodeLaser

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tube‐based‐polarized energy‐dispersive X‐ray fluorescence (EDXRF) is a powerful adaptation on traditional EDXRF, requiring very specific geometry and a scattering target to generate polarized X‐rays. This secondary target is typically chosen to be a metallic foil, allowing for the polarization of the incident X‐ray beam, and the addition of the secondary target's fluorescence response to the initial beam. A simulation, using GEANT4 Monte Carlo code, and an experimental confirmation were used to determine the optimal thickness of a metallic secondary target for use in tube‐based‐polarized EDXRF. The optimal thickness was determined by looking at the signal‐to‐noise ratio (SNR). Using the results, the optimal thickness and tube potential were calculated for the common secondary target materials Cu, Mo, and Sn, when looking at an Fe sample. The optimal thickness results were compared with the results when using an ‘infinitely thick’ target. The results show improvements in SNRs of 6 − 17 % , illustrating the potential benefits of such calculations. Additionally, the optimal collimation of a polarized EDXRF system was examined, and it was found that increasing the total count rate should be the primary goal of geometrical optimization. If the count rate of the experimental setup is limited by tube output, then having the largest possible collimators yielded the maximum SNR. In contrast, if the count rate is limited by detector dead time, then decreasing the collimator size between secondary target and sample provided the maximal SNR. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.252 · 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