MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2910139527 · doi:10.1063/1.5084640

Ray tracing based performance optimization of an x-ray beamline that incorporates a sagittally curved mirror

2019· article· en· W2910139527 on OpenAlexaffabout
Emilio Heredia, B. Yates, Roman Chernikov

Bibliographic record

VenueAIP conference proceedings · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced X-ray Imaging Techniques
Canadian institutionsCanadian Light Source (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeamlineOpticsPhysicsCollimated lightRay tracing (physics)CurvatureCurved mirrorDeflection (physics)MonochromatorBeam (structure)X-ray opticsGeometryX-rayMathematicsLaser

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

X-ray mirrors with sagittal curvature are often used at X-ray beamlines to focus or collimate the beam horizontally. However, if placed in front of a monochromator, the vertical beam divergence introduced by such mirrors can significantly decrease energy resolution and make the beamline more sensitive to misalignment. Such is the case of BioXAS-Side beamline at the Canadian Light Source Inc. To find a cost effective way to minimize the negative effects of a toroidal first mirror while preserving flu x, we used the ray tracing package XRT to simulate the beamline, understand the cause of the observed problems, and investigate ways to improve performance. We confirmed that the optimal solution would be to limit the horizontal acceptance of the toroidal mirror, as commonly done, because the sagittal curvature of the mirror contributes to the vertical deflection of the light rays proportionally to their transversal coordinate. However, that was not an option in our case given the high cost of white-beam slits and space limitations specific to this project. Instead we used a v-shaped slit limiting the beam horizontally right after the monochromator, where rays with very different energies are still not merged together. The v-slit was cheaper to manufacture and install than a white beam slit in front of the mirror, while it improved energy resolution and decreased its dependence on beamline alignment equally well. The procedure we detail here can be generalized and used to design or improve similar systems, especially when mirrors with sagittal curvature are involved.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.874
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.234 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIP conference proceedingsSame topicAdvanced X-ray Imaging TechniquesFrench-language works237,207