MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Toward an End-to-End Model for ISAC-I Accelerators

2018· article· en· W2894823096 on OpenAlexaff
Olivier Shelbaya, O. Kester

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle Detector Development and Performance
Canadian institutionsTRIUMF
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDowntimeLinear particle acceleratorComputer scienceTransmission (telecommunications)End-to-end principleBeam (structure)PhysicsOperating systemTelecommunicationsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diurnal-like transmission variations in the ISAC-I warm accelerator system necessitates periodic retuning by operators. While beam loss points are well known, re-tuning nevertheless results in additional downtime and reduced count rates at experiments. This has motivated the development of an end-to-end simulation of the ISAC-I linear accelerator (linac) system to understand and characterize the nature of transmission instabilities spanning several hours to days.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.773
Threshold uncertainty score0.523

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.224 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicParticle Detector Development and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207