MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2906192340 · doi:10.1134/s1547477118070087

A New Superconducting Linac for the Nuclotron–NICA Facility: Progress Report

2018· article· en· W2906192340 on OpenAlexaff
Alina A. Bakinovskaya, M.A. Baturitsky, Tatyana Bakhareva, Andrey Butenko, М. А. Гусарова, S. E. Demyanov, N. E. Emelyanov, V. G. Zalessky, Vladimir Zvyagintsev, V. Karpovich, Т. V. Kulevoy, А. А. Кураев, M. V. Lalayan, Yu. Yu. Lozeev, С. А. Максименко, В. В. Матвеенко, S. V. Matsievsky, Vladimir Petrakovsky, I. L. Pobol, A. I. Pokrovsky, С. М. Полозов, Alexey Pronikov, А. О. Рак, V. N. Rodionova, A. V. Samoshin, A. Sidorin, N.P. Sobenin, Dmitriy Surkov, E. Syresin, K. V. Taletsky, Grigorii V. Trubnikov, В. Л. Шатохин, D. A. Shparlo, Siarhei Yurevich

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics of Particles and Nuclei Letters · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicParticle accelerators and beam dynamics
Canadian institutionsTRIUMF
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinear particle acceleratorPhysicsInjectorNuclear physicsBeam (structure)Nuclear engineeringOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The project for a new injector linac for the Nuclotron–NICA accelerator tandem has been under development since 2015. The linac will accelerate protons and light ions to energies of 25 MeV and ∼7.5 MeV/nucleon, respectively. To fulfill the project, technology for fabricating superconducting RF cavities needs to be developed. The current status of the project, including the linac design, the required parameters of RF cavities, and our simulations of beam dynamics, is presented. Technological restrictions on the RF cavity parameters are discussed.

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)0.004
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations7
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics of Particles and Nuclei LettersSame topicParticle accelerators and beam dynamicsFrench-language works237,207