MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7106791609 · doi:10.14288/cjur.v8i1.198594

Design of an asymmetrically biased triple Langmuir probe and accompanying diagnostics tool

2023· article· en· W7106791609 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Collections · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPlasma Diagnostics and Applications
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLangmuir probePlasma diagnosticsPlasmaMeasure (data warehouse)LangmuirVoltageBiasing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A refined triple Langmuir probe design is described for use in a glow discharge device, which creates plasma by applying a large bias voltage across a neutral gas. The goal is to design a Langmuir probe which can measure the plasma temperature, density, and floating potential to within an order of magnitude while minimizing plasma perturbation. The probe functions in a plasma temperature range of 1-10 eV. First, an overview of the relevant theory is provided, followed by the design assumptions and a derivation of the working regime of the Langmuir probe. This working regime dictates the appropriate branch of Langmuir probe theory whose equations can be used to design the probe and extract the plasma electron temperature, density, and floating potential. Second, the probe’s radius, length, and electrode spacing are derived using the applicable branch of Langmuir probe theory. The derived probe radius, length, and electrode spacing are 0.18 mm, 3 mm, and 55 mm, respectively. Third, an overview of the electrical design used to measure the triple probe voltages and currents is described. Finally, a discussion of the limitations and future work is provided, with methods listed to improve the specificity of the relevant theory and the accuracy of the probe measurements.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen CollectionsSame topicPlasma Diagnostics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207