Bibliographic record
Abstract
Preliminary Radiation Shielding Design for BOOMERANG R. J. Donahue Lawrence Berkeley National Lab June 11, 2003 Abstract Preliminary radiation shielding specifications are presented here for the 3 GeV BOOMERANG Australian synchrotron light source project. At this time the bulk shield walls for the storage ring and injection system (100 MeV Linac and 3 GeV Booster) are considered for siting purposes. Introduction These estimates were prompted by the BOOMERANG Workshop held at LBNL in October, 2002. BOOMERANG is planned to be a 3 GeV, 400 mA 3 rd generation light source with a 20 hr lifetime and 210 m circumference. This corresponds to a stored beam of 1.75 × 10 12 e − . Shielding estimates are made for the storage ring. Booster and LINAC shielding estimates will be made elsewhere. Comparison With Existing/Planned Facilities A comparison of the concrete shielding requirements for existing or planned synchrotron facilities is shown in Table 1. They are the Canadian Light Source (CLS - 2.9 GeV, 500 mA), the SPEAR3 facility at SLAC (3 GeV, 500 mA), and the Advanced Light Source at LBNL (ALS - 1.9 GeV, 400 mA). The 4th column, ALS*, represents the ALS shielding values scaled to 3 GeV and 400 mA for BOOMERANG. Assumptions All beam loss scenarios are assumed to be roughly the same as those of the LBNL Advanced Light Source (ALS)[1]. The ALS storage ring shield walls were divided into three areas; standard walls (8 out of 12 sectors), special walls (3 out of 12 sectors), and injection (1 out of 12 sectors). The
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.009 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".