MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

LINAC Section 3 and 4 Replacement at the Canadian Light Source

2021· article· en· W6906572158 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueJACOW · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicParticle Accelerators and Free-Electron Lasers
Canadian institutionsChicken Farmers of Saskatchewan (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinear particle acceleratorBeam (structure)SynchrotronParticle acceleratorSynchrotron light sourceSection (typography)Power (physics)Klystron

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Light Source Inc. (CLSI), opened in 2004 and located in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada, is a third-generation synchrotron light source facility with a 2.9 GeV storage ring. CLSI was built based on the Saskatchewan Accelerator Laboratory (SAL) with its LINAC. The SAL LINAC was built in 1960s and refurbished to operate at 250 MeV in 2002. It was also de-signed at an average beam power up to 46KW. To be used by CLS, the LINAC was modified for operation at pulse power levels of 25 MW with the current 100 mA. The modified LINAC consists of an electron gun and section 0 to 6, Energy Compression System (ECS) and Section 7. The LINAC has kept a steady performance throughout the years, along with many repairs and replacements ’ most of which are preventative. The original Varian type accelerating Sections are planned to be replaced gradual-ly by SLAC type Sections. Section 3 and 4 are two of the original 3 Varian type sections left in CLS - with over 55 years of service, they were accumulating vacuum leak problems from time to time. The replacement of Section 3 and 4 was completed in 2020. The mechanical consideration of the Section 3 and 4 replacement mainly includes upgrading supporting structures, designing Wave-guides, modifying LCW systems, getting solution to move the sections around in the LINAC tunnel, etc.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.357
Threshold uncertainty score0.650

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.176 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJACOWSame topicParticle Accelerators and Free-Electron LasersFrench-language works237,207