MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Experimental results of a YBCO bulk superconducting undulator magnetic optimization

2024· article· en· W4403301258 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Marco Calvi, A. Larry Arsenault, Xiaoyang Liang, Thomas M. Schmidt, A R Dennis, J H Durrell, Carlos Gafa, Andrew Sammut, Nicholas Sammut, Mark Ainslie, Ryota Kinjo, Kai Zhang, Sebastian Hellmann

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Accelerators and Beams · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceEuropean Commission
KeywordsCondensed matter physicsSuperconductivityUndulatorMaterials sciencePhysicsNuclear physicsElectron

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The magnetic field optimization of RE-Ba-Cu-O (REBCO, <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <a:mrow> <a:mi>RE</a:mi> <a:mo>=</a:mo> <a:mtext>rare</a:mtext> </a:mrow> </a:math> earth) bulk superconducting undulators is a fundamental step toward their implementation in an accelerator driven photon source, like a synchrotron or a free electron laser. In this article, we propose a sorting algorithm to reduce the undulator’s phase error based on the reconstruction of the trapped current inside the bulks of a staggered array undulator. The results obtained with a YBCO short prototype field-cooled down to 10 K in a 10 T magnetic field are reported. Finally, its performance is critically discussed in light of 2D magnetic field maps of its individual components, obtained at <c:math xmlns:c="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <c:mrow> <c:msub> <c:mrow> <c:mi>LN</c:mi> </c:mrow> <c:mrow> <c:mn>2</c:mn> </c:mrow> </c:msub> </c:mrow> </c:math> after the magnetization tests. Published by the American Physical Society 2024

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.842
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review Accelerators and BeamsSame topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207