MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Recent Developments for Cyclotron Extraction Foils at TRIUMF

2018· article· en· W3130117954 on OpenAlexaff
Yu. Bylinskii, R. Baartman, Paul Dirksen, Yi‐Nong Rao, V. Verzilov

Bibliographic record

VenueJACOW · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear Physics and Applications
Canadian institutionsTRIUMF
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCyclotronExtraction (chemistry)PhysicsNuclear physicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The TRIUMF 500 MeV H− cyclotron employs stripping foils to extract multiple beams for different experimental programs. The upgrades in foil material and foil holders lead to significant improvements in beam quality and foil life time, as well as reduction of Be-7 contamination originated in the foils. Thus, an accumulated beam charge extracted with a single foil increased from ~60 mA·hours to more than 500 mA·hours. A key role that lead to these advances was an understanding of the foil heating mechanism, major contribution to which is paid by the power deposition from electrons stripped by the foil. To further diminish this effect, we recently introduced a foil tilt from the vertical orientation that allows stripped electrons fast escape from the foil, well before losing their original momentum through the heat deposition. Other improvements were related to operational issues. Introduction of a "combo" foil consisting of wide portion and thin wire allowed both high and low intensity beam extraction without foils sacrifice. Deploying a wedge foil for extraction at 100 MeV helped reduction of beam intensity instabilities caused by beam vertical size and position fluctuations.

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)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.287 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJACOWSame topicNuclear Physics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207