Generation of electron vortices using non-exact electric fields
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vortices in electron beams can manifest several types of topological phenomena, such as the formation of exotic structures or interactions with topologically structured electromagnetic fields. For instance, the wavefunction of an electron beam can acquire a phase vortex upon propagating through a magnetic monopole, which, in practice, provides a convenient method for generating electron vortex beams. Here, we show how an electric field must be structured in order to achieve a similar e ect. We find that, much as in the case of magnetic fields, closed but not exact electric fields can produce electron vortex beams. We proceed by fabricating a versatile near-obstruction-free device that is designed to approximately produce such fields and we systematically study their influence on incoming electron beams. With such a single device, electron vortex beams that are defined by a wide range of topological charges can be produced by means of a slight variation of an applied voltage. For this reason, this device is expected to be important in applications that rely on the sequential generation and manipulation of di erent types of electron vortices
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".