Toward electron temperature profiles in hot-dense plasmas from x-ray spectral ensembles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High repetition rate laser systems enable new strategies for diagnosing plasma behavior with large datasets. Here, we define an ensemble technique that relies on randomized targeting of x-ray tracer micro-stripes. On each shot, a high-intensity laser pulse is focused on a solid target with Ti tracer stripes embedded in an Al foil, randomly targeting a micro-stripe, a portion of a stripe, or a gap between stripes. High-resolution, time-integrated x-ray spectrometers capture line emission from the portion of the micro-stripe that is heated to sufficiently high electron temperatures. Accumulation of many such cases is used to construct ensemble distributions of x-ray line intensities that encompass all relative offsets of the laser focus to the micro-stripe centers. Synthetic intensity distributions are likewise generated using collisional-radiative modeling. Bayesian fitting of modeled to measured intensity distributions establishes the most likely radial temperature profiles, enabling comparison to hydrodynamic models and calling into question the cylindrical symmetry of these micro-stripe-embedded systems. Ensemble techniques have significant potential for high-energy-density plasma diagnostics, especially with the advent of high repetition rate experiments.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".