Geometrically Modified Einzel Lenses, From the Conventional Cylindrical Einzel Lens to Cubic and Continuous Einzel Lens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
New geometrical counterparts to the conventional Einzel lens, cubic, and the continuous body electrostatic (CBE) lenses are introduced and their performances are investigated in terms of different aberrations and input beam properties. Design curves for the continuous body electrostatic lens are presented. Relative sensitivity is proposed as a figure of merit, based on which the focusing characteristics of the two new lenses are compared with that of a conventional Einzel, and a quadrupole lenses of the same size, as well. Moreover, performance and characteristics of the lenses are compared in terms of their corresponding sensitivities to the applied voltage and the incidence beam nonidealities. Electric field distributions of the lenses are studied, and different aberrations are discussed. It is shown that considering chromatic nonparaxial beams, the CBE lens outperforms the conventional Einzel lens in terms of the sensitivity and the absolute value of the lens demagnification.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".