MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Distributed Matching Scheme and a Flexible Deterministic Matching Algorithm for Arbitrary Systems

2016· article· en· W6887854503 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJACOW · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicParticle Accelerators and Free-Electron Lasers
Canadian institutionsTRIUMF
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMatching (statistics)Flexibility (engineering)Measure (data warehouse)3-dimensional matchingOptimal matchingScheme (mathematics)Blossom algorithmDistributed algorithmBetatron

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Paradigm complementary to conventional betatron matching is explored, with matching distributed across the entire line. This can have varying degrees of advantage depending on acuteness of issues in a conventional scheme: -Limited flexibility for matching section -Limit on envelope/magnet everywhere -Excessive envelope/magnet strength caused by matching -Harmful local blowup -Slow algorithm -Unpredictable solution -Lack of options/insight/control on implementation. Driven by above need, a betatron matching algorithm was developed suitable for any beamline configuration, including coupled 4D, providing deterministic, rigorous optimal solutions spanning complete tradeoff between mismatch and quad strength, thus allowing insight and control before implementation. It also shows promise of global optimum. Combined with distributed matching this algorithm promises additional advantages of speed, determinism and user flexibility in terms of degree of implementation, matching objective, and geographical profile of mismatch. Preliminary results, computational demands/challenges and possibilities for its extension into more complicated problems will be discussed.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.901
Threshold uncertainty score0.484

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.214 · 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