MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Design of the Superconducting Quarter Wave Resonators for HIAF

2017· article· en· W2944544122 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cong Zhang, Long Chen, Qingwei Chu, Hao Guo, Yuan He, Shichun Huang, Yulu Huang, Tiancai Jiang, Lu Li, Yongming Li, Feng Pan, Teng Tan, Ruoxu Wang, Andong Wu, Wu Qiangjun, Pingran Xiong, Weiming Yue, Shenghu Zhang, Shengxue Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueJACOW · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicParticle accelerators and beam dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)SuperconductivityResonatorPhysicsElectrical engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringOptoelectronicsCondensed matter physicsHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A heavy ion accelerator facility (HIAF) is under development in the Institute of Modern Physics. For the low energy superconducting accelerating section, two types of quarter wave resonators with frequency of 81.25 MHz and β of 0.05 and 0.10 have been proposed. The electro-magnetic design has been optimized in order to reach the high accelerating voltage, and the optimization also included the drift tube face tilting to compensate for the beam steering caused by the asymmetry in the quarter wave resonator geometry.

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 score0.685
Threshold uncertainty score0.187

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJACOWSame topicParticle accelerators and beam dynamicsFrench-language works237,207