MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Dynamic Tuner Development for Medium β Superconducting Elliptical Cavities

2018· paratext· en· W2935439474 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Crispin Contreras-Martinez, E. Borissov, S. Cheban, P. N. Ostroumov, Yuriy Pischalnikov, Vyacheslav Yakovlev, Jae-Chul Yun

Bibliographic record

VenueOSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) · 2018
Typeparatext
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicParticle accelerators and beam dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of PhysicsTRIUMFMichigan State UniversityHigh Energy PhysicsU.S. Department of EnergyCollege of Engineering, Michigan State UniversityOffice of ScienceNational Science Foundation
KeywordsTunerSuperconductivityMaterials sciencePhysicsOptoelectronicsComputer scienceRadio frequencyTelecommunicationsCondensed matter physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Facility for Rare Isotope Beams (FRIB) is developing a 5-cell 644 MHz β_{o}pt=0.65 elliptical cavity for a future linac energy upgrade to 400 MeV/u for the heaviest uranium ions. Superconducting elliptical cavities operated in continuous wave, such as the ones for FRIB, are prone to microphonics which can excite mechanical modes of the cavities. It has been shown that the detuning due to microphonics can be mitigated with the use of piezo actuators (fast tuner) as opposed to the costly option of increasing the input RF power. The FRIB slow/fast dynamic tuner will be based on the Fermilab experience with similar tuners like those developed for the linac coherent light source (LCLS) II and proton improvement plan (PIP) II. This paper will present the results of tuner properties on the bench.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information)Same topicParticle accelerators and beam dynamicsFrench-language works237,207