MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Redundant field survey data of cyclotron with imperfect median plane

2023· article· en· W4324046122 on OpenAlexaff
L.G. Zhang, Yi‐Nong Rao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Instrumentation · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicParticle accelerators and beam dynamics
Canadian institutionsTRIUMF
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCyclotronPhysicsMedian planeField (mathematics)Computational physicsBeam (structure)Nuclear physicsOpticsPlasmaMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An accurate and detailed field map is important for cyclotron beam dynamics studies. During the long history of cyclotron studies, many techniques have been developed by cyclotron pioneers for the treatment of median plane field map. In this paper, we take the TRIUMF 500 MeV cyclotron as an example to study the asymmetric field resulting from imperfect median plane symmetry. The “Gordon approach” and a highly accurate compact finite differentiation method are used to investigate the historical field survey data. The redundancy in the survey data is revealed by the expansion method, which also makes it possible to correct the error in the measurement. Finally, both the azimuthal field Bθ and the axial gradient of the axial field dBz /dz in the median plane are corrected using the radial field map Br . The influence of the correction is examined by recalculating the equilibrium orbit properties of the TRIUMF cyclotron. The result shows significantly increased vertical centering errors of the closed orbits. A further simulation study suggests that these centering errors can be reduced to below 1.5 cm by adjusting the trim coils' Br field within the output limits of our trim coils' power supplies. The error in the measurement field data may explain why the calculated trim coils' settings during the cyclotron commissioning in 1974 encountered difficulty.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designObservational
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 venueJournal of InstrumentationSame topicParticle accelerators and beam dynamicsFrench-language works237,207