Simulation of a Miniature Linear Ion Trap with Half-Round Rod Electrodes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The miniaturization of ion trap mass analyzers is an important direction in the development of mass spectrometers. In this work, we proposed two models of miniaturized HreLIT with a field radius of about 2 mm based on the existing research on conventional HreLIT and other ion traps, one with ions ejection slits on one pair of electrodes only (2-slit model) and the other with the same slits on all electrodes (4-slit model). The relationship of mass resolution with r/rx and the “stretch” distance of electrodes in the ejection direction is investigated by theoretical simulations. Trends of electric fields inside the ion traps were discussed as well. The comparable maximum resolution is observed at r/rx = 2/1.4 in both models, but stretching simulations revealed that the peak resolution of the 2-slit model was higher than that of the other model by about 8%. The highest value of 517 was obtained when stretching 1.1 mm. Furthermore, the resolution of ions with m/z = 119 could exceed 1000 when the scan rate was reduced to 800 Th/s. The mass spectrometry capability of miniature HreLIT has been confirmed theoretically, and it laid the foundation for the subsequent fabrication with MEMS technology.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".