MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Simulation Study of Halo Collimation in the TRIUMF Ariel Proton Beam Line

2017· article· en· W2972220917 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJACOW · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicParticle accelerators and beam dynamics
Canadian institutionsTRIUMF
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHaloCollimated lightPhysicsLine (geometry)Beam (structure)ProtonBeamlineNuclear physicsOpticsAstronomyGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The TRIUMF 500 MeV H⁻ cyclotron uses stripping foil extraction to drive several proton beam lines serving different experimental programs. As part of TRIUMF's Ariel facility now under construction, a new proton beam line 4-North will be installed to transport up to 100 microamps of 480 MeV protons to an ISOL target station for rare isotope beam production. This beam line has been designed for low-loss (< 1nA/m) operation and provides space for a collimator to remove the beam halo produced by large-angle scattering in the cyclotron extraction foil. We have studied proton loss patterns and collimation efficiency using simulation codes: the older REVMOC program and a fully 3D simulation based on Geant4, with all particle interactions in matter included. Scattering in the foil is treated by a separate iterated single-scatter model. Using these tools we arrive at a prototype design for an effective collimator.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.157
Threshold uncertainty score0.160

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.265 · 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