MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2912637002 · doi:10.1063/1.5060673

The effect of Coulomb repulsion on the space-time resolution limits for ultrafast electron diffraction

2019· article· en· W2912637002 on OpenAlexaff
A. A. Ischenko, И. В. Кочиков, R. J. Dwayne Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersMax-Planck-GesellschaftRussian Foundation for Basic Research
KeywordsElectronDiffractionPhysicsUltrafast electron diffractionElectron diffractionBrightnessCoulombUltrashort pulseAtomic physicsPulse (music)Computational physicsScatteringTemporal resolutionOpticsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of electron sources capable of temporal resolution on the order of 1 ps or less raises a number of questions associated with the estimation of the physical meaning and accuracy of the dynamic parameters based on the analysis of time-dependent scattering intensity. The use of low brightness ultrashort pulses with few electrons leads to the necessity for increasing the total exposure time and lengthening the time of data acquisition, with attendant problems with the limited sample. The sample restrictions can be mitigated by increasing the charge per pulse, i.e., by going to high brightness sources. Increasing in the number of electrons, however, is limited by the Coulomb repulsion between them, which leads on one hand to distortion of the diffraction pattern and on the other hand to an increase in the duration of the pulse. An analytical technique for estimating the deformation of the diffraction pattern caused by the Coulomb repulsion of the electrons in electron bunches with duration of less than 10 ps and the influence of this effect on the accuracy of determination of the interatomic distances is developed for the non-relativistic and relativistic regimes for electron energies.

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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.224

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations14
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207