Direct comparison of PEN and TPB wavelength shifters in a liquid argon detector
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A large number of particle detectors employ liquid argon as their target material owing to its high scintillation yield and its ability to drift ionization charge over large distances. Scintillation light from argon is peaked at 128 nm and a wavelength shifter is required for its efficient detection. In this work, we directly compare the light yield achieved in two identical liquid argon chambers, one of which is equipped with polyethylene naphthalate (PEN) and the other with tetraphenyl butadiene (TPB) wavelength shifter. Both chambers are lined with enhanced specular reflectors and instrumented with SiPMs with a coverage fraction of approximately 1%, which represents a geometry comparable to the future large scale detectors. We measured the light yield of the PEN chamber to be 39.4 $$\,\pm \,$$ ± 0.4(stat) $$\,\pm \,$$ ± 1.9(syst)% of the yield of the TPB chamber. Using a Monte Carlo simulation this result is used to extract the wavelength shifting efficiency of PEN relative to TPB equal to 47.2 $$\,\pm \,$$ ± 5.7%. This result paves the way for the use of easily available PEN foils as a wavelength shifter, which can substantially simplify the construction of future liquid argon detectors.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".