MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4250903001 · doi:10.1139/p00-083

Classical harmonic oscillator approach of a helical-wiggler free-electron laserwith axial guide field

2000· article· en· W4250903001 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohamed Nazih Rhimi, R. El-Bahi, Abdel Wahab Cheikhrouhou

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicParticle Accelerators and Free-Electron Lasers
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsWigglerHamiltonian (control theory)Harmonic oscillatorQuantum mechanicsClassical mechanicsElectronAngular momentumBoundary value problemFree-electron laserAmplitudeMagnetic fieldQuantum electrodynamicsCathode ray

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electron beam dynamics in a helical-wiggler free-electron laser (FEL) with a uniform axial guide magnetic field are studied using a three-dimensional Hamiltonian approach. The basic feature of the analysis is the definition of a rotational variable, [Formula: see text], that plays the primordial role in lowering to the half the dimension of the quadratic Hamiltonian as a system of two uncoupled oscillators with definite frequencies and amplitudes. It is through applying this variable in the vicinity of a fixed point that the Heisenberg picture of the dynamics of the particles comes to light, leading thus to the association of the steady-state ideal helical trajectories with arbitrary trajectories. The approach recognized the usual two constants of motion, one being the total energy while the other is the canonical axial angular momentum, P z' . If the value of the latter is such that a fixed point exists, the Hamiltonian is expanded about the fixed point up to second order. The so-obtained oscillator characteristic frequencies allowed one to study the different modes of propagation and to identify, and then avoid the problematic operating conditions of the FEL concerned. On the other hand, the amplitudes of the oscillations, which do depend on the frequencies, are fortunately found to be constants of motion and then controlled by the boundary conditions (initial conditions). PACS Nos.: 52.40-w, 52.60+h, 42.55.Tb, 52.75Ms

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicParticle Accelerators and Free-Electron LasersFrench-language works237,207