MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4316589987 · doi:10.1139/cjp-2022-0286

Analytical energy eigenvalues of a Dirac particle in focusing field of a quadrupole magnet

2023· article· en· W4316589987 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
H. F. Kisoglu

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicParticle accelerators and beam dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsEigenvalues and eigenvectorsMagnetMagnetic fieldFermionQuadrupole magnetQuantum electrodynamicsQuadrupoleDirac equationField (mathematics)Classical mechanicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, the motion of a charged spin-1/2 fermion is found out. It is assumed, in the system, that the free fermion is subjected to a linearly space-dependent magnetic field that can be supposed to be a focusing magnetic field of a quadrupole magnet in beam dynamics in the accelerator physics. In such an examination, two-component Dirac equation is solved via perturbation approximation of the asymptotic iteration method (AIM), which has been widely used for the last decades. The results show that the fermion is bounded to the magnetic field for a certain condition of the strength of the field. For such a system, the analytical form of the energy eigenvalues are obtained. Moreover, to see whether this analytical expression works properly, the numerical eigenvalues are compared with the ones obtained by direct use of the AIM. We have an inspiration that the studies on beam dynamics and magnet design in particle accelerator physics may gain from this work.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicParticle accelerators and beam dynamicsFrench-language works237,207