Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

BAGELS for simultaneous polarization, orbit, and optics control in electron storage rings

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Four orbit bumps can nearly double electron polarization in a storage ring.

desk verdict A genuinely useful method for spin-matching electron storage rings, with a real EIC-ESR payoff and one verification gap worth fixing before publication. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.10195 v1 pith:TCAKHMB7 submitted 2024-12-13 physics.acc-ph

M. G. Signorelli , G. H. Hoffstaetter This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.acc-ph
keywords polarizedelectronstorageringsradiativedepolarizationspinmatchingverticalorbitbumpsBAGELSEIC-ESRDerbenev-KondratenkoformulageneralizedRayleighquotient
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper claims that radiative depolarization in electron storage rings can be actively corrected with a minimal set of specially designed vertical orbit bumps, called BAGELS. The bumps are built as linear combinations of basis bumps chosen so that they tilt the spin direction where wanted while generating no delocalized vertical dispersion or transverse coupling to first order. A generalized Rayleigh quotient over response matrices picks a small number of knob combinations with maximal effect on the spin-orbit coupling function and minimal effect on orbit and optics. Applied to the 18 GeV EIC-ESR, four such knobs nearly double the asymptotic polarization in the one-IP lattice, more than triple it in the two-IP lattice, restore polarization across ten random-error seeds, and create vertical emittance for beam-size matching without destroying polarization. If correct, the method makes harmonic closed orbit spin matching unnecessary for operations and gives any polarized lepton ring a small set of operational knobs.

What carries the argument

The machinery is a generalized Rayleigh quotient maximization over response matrices. For basis bump strengths $\theta$, the paper defines response matrices $R_d$ for the spin-orbit coupling function at bend ends and $R_y$ for vertical orbit positions, then seeks $\theta$ maximizing $\|R_A\theta\|^2/\|R_B\theta\|^2$. The maximizers are generalized eigenvectors of the pair $A = R_A^T R_A$, $B = R_B^T R_B$; the top eigenvectors give the most effective, least invasive knob combinations. The basis bumps are the load-bearing geometric input: an opposite-$\pi$ pair cancels its own delocalized coupling and dispersion while producing a delocalized tilt of $\hat{n}_0$, an equal-$\pi$ pair makes coupling without dispersion, and a $2\pi$ pair makes vertical dispersion without coupling. These choices keep the first-order optics intact so that only a few knobs are needed.

What would settle it

Track polarization and optics in the real (or fully simulated with errors) 18 GeV EIC-ESR while scanning one BAGELS spin-matching knob over a range that includes the least-squares optimum; if the measured polarization maximum occurs at settings that disagree with the linear-response prediction, or if the delocalized vertical dispersion and coupling measured after turning on the knobs are not first-order small, the central claim fails. A simpler numerical check is to compare the $d$ response computed with large bump strengths against the linear response matrix prediction and see where the linearity breaks.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the spin-orbit coupling function $d$ left over by an incomplete spin match can be cancelled by deliberately tilting the invariant spin field $\hat{n}_0$ with vertical orbit bumps, and that the best bumps can be found by solving a generalized eigenproblem. Using opposite-$\pi$-pair basis bumps that cancel their own coupling and dispersion, the authors form response matrices for $d$ at the bends and for the vertical orbit around the ring, then take the largest generalized eigenvectors of the pair of covariance matrices. These eigenvectors are the "Best Adjustment Groups for ELectron Spin" knobs. In the ideal 1-IP 18 GeV EIC-ESR, four knobs with about 1 mm maximum orbit excursion nearly double the asymptotic polarization; in the 2-IP lattice they more than triple it, exceeding the 70 percent time-averaged requirement. The same construction yields polarization-safe coupling-correction knobs and vertical-emittance-creation knobs that work in nonlinear Monte Carlo tracking.

Load-bearing premise

The whole construction assumes the spin-orbit coupling function and the vertical orbit respond linearly to the basis bump strengths, and that the opposite-$\pi$ pairs cancel delocalized coupling and vertical dispersion to first order in the actual, error-corrected EIC-ESR lattice; if nonlinearities or residual coupling are significant, the least-squares knob settings from the response matrices may not reproduce the simulated polarization gains.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Four BAGELS knobs suffice to bring the 18 GeV 1-IP EIC-ESR asymptotic polarization to roughly double its uncorrected value and exceed the ESR requirement in nonlinear tracking.
  • In the 2-IP lattice, four knobs more than triple the asymptotic polarization, turning an insufficient lattice into one that meets the polarization requirement.
  • The same BAGELS procedure gives four polarization-safe global coupling correction knobs that restore coupling and spin match for ten random error seeds.
  • A single BAGELS coupling-creation or vertical-dispersion-creation knob can produce the roughly 2 nm vertical emittance needed for beam-size matching with minimal polarization loss.
  • Because the knobs are low-dimensional and linear in the corrector coils, they can be provided to the control room for operational optimization, making harmonic closed orbit spin matching unnecessary for this purpose.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The generalized-eigenvector construction is not tied to vertical orbit bumps: the paper notes the basis vectors could be single corrector strengths or other magnet settings, so the same knob recipe could be used to correct other slow drifts, such as tune or coupling changes during an energy ramp.
  • If the linear-response assumption holds, BAGELS could serve as an automated commissioning tool: measure the response matrices once, then let the control system re-solve the four-knob least-squares problem whenever polarization drops.
  • A testable extension is to apply BAGELS at lower energies (5 and 10 GeV) or to FCC-ee, where the dominant depolarization sources may be different, and check whether the same four-knob reduction remains sufficient.
  • The paper's success with the 2-IP lattice suggests that adding a second spin rotator is not the main obstacle to polarization; the obstacle is the lack of a longitudinal spin match, which BAGELS compensates without stronger solenoids.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents BAGELS, a method for constructing a small number of vertical-orbit-bump knobs that optimally impact the spin-orbit coupling function d while minimally affecting the closed orbit. The authors derive first-order spin-orbit equations, define three basis-bump types (opposite-π pairs, equal-π pairs, 2π pairs) with claimed localized or delocalized coupling and dispersion properties, and use principal component analysis through a generalized Rayleigh quotient to reduce the space of corrector groups. They apply four BAGELS spin-matching knobs to the 18 GeV EIC-ESR, reporting nearly doubled asymptotic polarization in the 1-IP lattice and more than tripled in the 2-IP lattice in nonlinear Monte Carlo tracking. They also construct polarization-safe global coupling-correction knobs and vertical-emittance-creation knobs, tested on 10 error seeds of the 1-IP lattice, and conclude that BAGELS can simultaneously control polarization, orbit, and optics in EIC-ESR and similar rings.

Significance. If the claims hold, this is a significant practical advance for the EIC-ESR and for future polarized lepton rings. The methodological core is clean: Eqs. (33)-(40) reduce an operational multi-knob problem to a small generalized eigenproblem, and the use of basis bumps rather than individual correctors is well motivated. The paper deserves credit for validating with third-order map tracking rather than relying only on analytical d, for testing 10 random error seeds with realistic errors, and for providing an open-source implementation. The main gap is that the 'simultaneous optics control' part is not directly quantified in the actual lattice; the cancellation properties of the basis bumps are shown only in an ideal FODO. Since the main application result is supported by nonlinear tracking, this gap is fixable by reporting residuals.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. IV A and Figs. 2-9] The central claim that the BAGELS spin-matching bumps generate no delocalized transverse coupling nor delocalized vertical dispersion is demonstrated in Fig. 2 only for a perfectly periodic FODO with exactly 90 degrees phase advance and ideal sextupole families. In the actual EIC-ESR, the arcs are not strictly periodic and the sawtooth orbit correction described in Sec. V A 1 changes the closed orbit through the sextupoles, so the exact cancellation argument need not hold. The paper reports d and the closed orbit in Figs. 3 and 5, and polarizations and vertical emittances for 10 seeds in Sec. V B, but it never reports the residual normalized coupling matrix or the residual vertical dispersion after the BAGELS bumps are applied in the as-corrected 1-IP, 2-IP, or error-seed lattices. Without that quantification, the abstract's 'simultaneous ... optics control' claim is not independently verified. Please add before/after profiles or RMS values of the coupling matrix norm and vertical dispersion for the actual lattices, or temper the claim.
  2. [Sec. IV A, Eq. (36)] The reduction of the analytical d curve shown in Figs. 3 and 5 is obtained by a least-squares fit of the knob strengths to -(fd)_0, so the analytical before/after comparison is not a prediction. The independent evidence is the third-order map tracking, which is not used to set the strengths in the ideal-lattice scans. The paper should state this explicitly wherever BAGELS is claimed to increase polarization from analytical curves, and ideally demonstrate predictive content by fitting Eq. (36) on a subset of bends and comparing on held-out bends, or by comparing the tracking result for the least-squares strengths against a randomly chosen set of knob strengths.
  3. [Sec. IV B, Eq. (40)] The generalized Rayleigh quotient construction requires R_B to have full column rank so that B = R_B^T R_B is positive definite. The paper asserts this is guaranteed by choosing an orthogonal basis of opposite-π pairs, but the relevant object is the response matrix, not the geometric independence of the orbit kicks. For the EIC-ESR applications, please report the rank or condition number of the normalized R_B used in Eqs. (42) and (45), and state how close the smallest eigenvalue of B is to zero; otherwise the numerical solution of Eq. (40) is not fully characterized.
  4. [Sec. V C 1] The working point of the lattice is changed from (0.08, 0.14, 0.05) to (0.08, 0.15, 0.045) after constructing the coupling-creation BAGELS knob. Since the BAGELS response matrices are computed for a given lattice, the paper should clarify whether the knob and the spin-matching knobs were recomputed at the new working point or whether the same eigenvectors were reused; if the latter, the method's validity at the changed working point is an extra assumption that should be tested.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. IV A, Fig. 2] The terms 'localized' and 'delocalized' are used informally; please define them quantitatively, for example by requiring the induced coupling matrix norm or vertical dispersion to be nonzero only within a specified number of cells or below a stated threshold.
  2. [Sec. V B] The phrase 'BAGELS bumps' is used both for the physical orbit bumps and for the knobs constructed from eigenvectors; please distinguish these consistently throughout the text.
  3. [Fig. 10 caption] The caption contains a duplicated phrase: 'using a single BAGELS single BAGELS coupling-creation bump' should be corrected.
  4. [Sec. III and V] The paper does not provide the actual knob strengths or basis-bump coefficients for the EIC-ESR applications; these should be supplied as supplementary material to support operational use and reproduction.
  5. [Sec. V A 1] The text should clarify whether the BAGELS bumps are applied before or after the sawtooth orbit correction, since the orbit correction changes the closed orbit through the sextupoles and therefore affects the response matrices used in Eq. (36).

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the analytical BAGELS curve is a least-squares fit, but the doubling/tripling claims rest on independent nonlinear tracking.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation is not circular. The BAGELS knob vectors are obtained from a generalized eigenvector (PCA) problem on response matrices, Eqs. (37)-(40), a construction explicitly credited to the standard eigenvalue tutorial [24] and not presented as an externally imported uniqueness theorem. The knob strengths in the ideal-lattice scans are the least-squares solution of Eq. (36), which minimizes the analytical spin-orbit coupling function d at bend ends; consequently, the 'with BAGELS' analytical Pdk curves in Figs. 4 and 6 are consequences of that fit and are not used as independent evidence. The load-bearing, externally checkable evidence is the third-order-map nonlinear Monte Carlo tracking, whose knob strengths were not tuned: the abstract's 'nearly double' and 'more than triple' claims are supported by the tracking curves and captions. In the random-error study, the BAGELS coupling and spin knobs are varied until the respective targets are minimized or maximized, so those post-tuning values are demonstrations of controllability rather than predictions, and the paper presents them as such. The only self-citations [5, 25] provide prior context for the EIC baseline polarization and are mirrored by the in-paper 'without orbit bumps' curves, so they are not load-bearing. The assumption that opposite-pi-pair basis bumps cancel delocalized coupling and vertical dispersion outside an ideal 90-degree FODO is an unquantified correctness risk, not a circularity, because it is a physical premise tested by tracking rather than an input renamed as an output.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced; BAGELS is a control-space construction. The free parameters are optimization choices (number of knobs, strengths, working point, normalization weights) that the central simulation results depend on.

free parameters (5)
  • Number of BAGELS knobs k = 4
    Authors choose the top four generalized eigenvectors for spin matching and coupling correction; this truncation is a free choice that affects all reported gains.
  • BAGELS knob strengths in ideal lattice = not tabulated
    Strengths are the least-squares solution of Eq. (36) for each application; they are optimized control settings, not universal constants.
  • Working point for coupling-based emittance creation = (Qx, Qy, Qs) = (0.08, 0.15, 0.045)
    Moved from (0.08, 0.14, 0.05) after observing the Qy-Qx-Qs resonance in nonlinear tracking; the Sec. V C 1 result depends on this post-hoc change.
  • Response matrix normalization weights = 2-norm per submatrix
    Submatrices are normalized by their matrix 2-norm to equalize scales; this weighting changes the generalized eigenvectors and thus the knobs.
  • Basis bump type selection = opposite pi pairs, equal pi pairs, 2 pi bumps
    Choice of basis bumps is made by hand for each application and is load-bearing for the cancellation properties.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption First-order spin-orbit and Derbenev-Kondratenko theory describe radiative depolarization
    Sec. II; all analytical d and Pdk values use this theory, with the closed-orbit approximation d approximately d(zc.o.).
  • domain assumption Basis bumps produce no delocalized vertical dispersion or coupling
    Sec. IV A and Figs. 2, 7, 12; argued from 90-degree FODO phase and sextupole families, not proven in the as-corrected ring.
  • domain assumption Response of d and orbit to bump strengths is linear
    Eqs. (31) through (40); PCA and least-squares assume linearity; nonlinear tracking checks only the final combined solution.
  • standard math Rayleigh quotient maximization via generalized eigenvalue problem A theta = lambda B theta
    Eq. (40); requires B symmetric positive definite and Cholesky decomposition.
  • domain assumption d at bend ends weighted by sqrt(L|g|^3) is a sufficient proxy for depolarization
    Sec. IV A; assumes all bends have similar length and strength, approximately true in EIC-ESR arcs.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of BAGELS for simultaneous polarization, orbit, and optics control in electron storage rings." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TCAKHMB7

@misc{pith2026241210195,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: BAGELS for simultaneous polarization, orbit, and optics control in electron storage rings},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TCAKHMB7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.10195}
}
read the original abstract

We present a new method for minimizing the effects of radiative depolarization in electron storage rings by use of a minimal number of special vertical orbit bumps. The bumps can be used to minimize the effects of radiative depolarization while simultaneously maintaining other common benefits of vertical orbits, e.g. transverse coupling and vertical dispersion control. Because simultaneously optimizing the large number of vertical correctors in a ring is operationally infeasible, we use dimensionality reduction to define a minimal number of most effective groups of vertical correctors that can be optimized during operation, motivating the name ``Best Adjustment Groups for ELectron Spin'' (BAGELS). The method is streamlined by using suitable ``basis bumps'' instead of all individual vertical correctors. We define three types of basis bumps for different purposes: (1) generates no delocalized transverse coupling nor delocalized vertical dispersion, (2) generates no delocalized vertical dispersion, and (3) generates no delocalized transverse coupling. BAGELS has been essential in the design of the Electron Storage Ring (ESR) of the Electron-Ion Collider (EIC), and will be beneficial for any polarized electron ring, including FCC-ee. HERA and LEP would have likely benefitted as well. We use BAGELS to significantly increase polarization in the 18 GeV EIC-ESR, beyond achievable with conventional methods; in the 1-IP lattice, we nearly double the asymptotic polarization, and in the 2-IP lattice we more than triple the asymptotic polarization. We also use BAGELS to construct knobs that can be used for global coupling correction, and knobs that generate vertical emittance for beam size matching, all while having minimal impacts on the polarization and orbit/optics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.10195 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Top-down view of the spin rotator of the ESR, with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Opposite [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. An energy scan of the asymptotic polarization in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (10 more)
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. The spin-orbit coupling function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. The spin-orbit coupling function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. An energy scan of the asymptotic polarization in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Vertical closed orbit in 10 error seeds of the 1-IP [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. A 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Closed orbit in a 1-IP 18 GeV EIC-ESR after using [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. An energy scan of the asymptotic polarization in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13. Closed orbit in a 1-IP 18 GeV EIC-ESR after using [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14. An energy scan of the asymptotic polarization in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_14.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Polarized electron bunch refresh rates in an electron storage ring

    physics.acc-ph 2025-01 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    For polarized electron bunches in a storage ring, the total refresh rate needed to maintain a fixed time-averaged polarization depends almost entirely on the buildup time constant, not on the asymptotic radiative pola...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

36 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    For spin matching, every orthogonal opposite π pair, which create no delocalized vertical dispersion nor delocalized coupling, is ideal

    Choose the basis bumps/vectors: The choice of basis vectors should be guided by the goal. For spin matching, every orthogonal opposite π pair, which create no delocalized vertical dispersion nor delocalized coupling, is ideal. In Sec. V B and Sec. V C we define two different types of useful basis vectors for different applications

    work page

  2. [2]

    When combin- ing the response matrices of multiple quantities into either RA or RB, each submatrix may be normal- ized too to weigh the treatment of the different re- sponses

    Construct the response matrices: All quanti- ties in consideration must have a sufficiently linear relationship with the basis vectors. When combin- ing the response matrices of multiple quantities into either RA or RB, each submatrix may be normal- ized too to weigh the treatment of the different re- sponses

    work page

  3. [3]

    Calculate the generalized eigenvectors of the covariance matrices to obtain the Best Ad- justment Groups for ELectron Spin: The best groups will be those eigenvectors with the largest eigenvalues for maximal/minimal impact on polar- ization. V. RESUL TS A. Spin Match the Ideal Ring

    work page

  4. [4]

    sawtooth

    1-IP 18 GeV EIC-ESR To apply BAGELS in the ideal 1-IP 18 GeV EIC-ESR, we use an orthogonal basis consisting of opposite π pairs in the four arcs surrounding the spin rotator, two on either side. With radiation damping turned off, we cal- culate the responses of d p L|g|3 at the ends of each bend (which we aim to maximize), as well as the vertical or- bit ...

    work page

  5. [5]

    a” and “b

    2-IP 18 GeV EIC-ESR In the 2-IP ESR, both interaction points including spin rotators are separated by one periodic arc section. To spin match this lattice, we use an orthogonal basis con- sisting of opposite π pairs in the four arcs surrounding both spin rotators, i.e. two arcs upstream of the first spin rotator and two arcs downstream the second spin rot...

    work page

  6. [6]

    a” mode corresponds to the horizontal and the “b

    If there is no transverse coupling, then χ = 1, ¯C = 0, and the “a” mode corresponds to the horizontal and the “b” mode the vertical. The matrix ¯C is referred to as the normalized coupling matrix, and provides a good measure of the coupling at a point in the ring. We apply BAGELS seeking groups which maximally impact the normalized coupling matrix compon...

    work page

  7. [7]

    A. A. Sokolov and I. M. Ternov, On Polarization and Spin Effects in the Theory of Synchrotron Radiation, Sov. Phys. Doklady 8, 1203 (1964)

    work page 1964

  8. [8]

    Delocalized Transverse Coupling The BAGELS global coupling correction bumps we cal- culated in Sec. V B have a maximum impact on the nor- malized coupling matrix components around the ring, a minimal impact on both the spin-orbit coupling func- tion and the orbit, and by design create no delocalized vertical dispersion. This makes the BAGELS coupling corr...

    work page

Show all 36 references
  1. [9]

    opposite π pair

    Delocalized Vertical Dispersion Using the coupling formalism as in Sec. V B, we can define a- and b-mode periodic dispersions as   ηa η′ a ηb η′ b   = G−1 ¯V−1G   ηx η′ x ηy η′ y   . (43) The excitation of a “b”-mode (vertical-like) amplitude caused by photon emiss...

  2. [10]

    ZEUS Collaboration, Measurement of high-q2 charged current deep inelastic scattering cross sections with a lon- gitudinally polarised positron beam at hera, The Euro- pean Physical Journal C 70, 945 (2010)

    2010

  3. [11]

    Willeke and J

    F. Willeke and J. Beebe-Wang, Electron ion collider con- ceptual design report 2021 10.2172/1765663 (2021)

    2021 doi

  4. [12]

    D. P. Barber and G. Ripken, Handbook of Accelerator Physics and Engineering (3rd Edition) (World Scientific Publishing Company, 2023) Chap. 2.6.6 - 2.6.8

    2023

  5. [13]

    A. W. Chao, Evaluation of radiative spin polarization in an electron storage ring, Nucl. Inst. and Meth. 180, 29 (1981)

    1981

  6. [14]

    M. G. Signorelli, G. H. Hoffstaetter, and V. Ptitsyn, Electron polarization preservation in the EIC, JACoW IP AC2023, MOPA052 (2023)

    2023

  7. [15]

    G. H. Hoffstaetter, J. Ellison, and H. S. Dumas, Adi- abatic invariance of spin-orbit motion in accelerators, Physical Review Special Topics - Accelerators and Beams 9, 014001 (2006)

    2006

  8. [16]

    D. P. Barber, H. Mais, G. Ripken, and R. Rossmanith, A General Harmonic Spin Matching Formalism for the Sup- pression of Depolarization Caused by Closed Orbit Dis- tortions in Electron Storage Rings, DESY-85-044 (1985)

    1985

  9. [17]

    V. N. Baier and V. M. Katkov, Quantum effects in mag- netic bremsstrahlung, Physics Letters A 25, 492 (1967)

    1967

  10. [18]

    V. N. Baier, V. M. Katkov, and V. M. Strakhovenko, Kinetics of radiative polarization, Sov. Phys. JETP 31, 908 (1970)

    1970

  11. [19]

    Y. S. Derbenev and A. M. Kondratenko, Polarization kinematics of particles in storage rings, Sov. Phys. JETP 37, 968 (1973)

    1973

  12. [20]

    S. R. Mane, Electron-spin polarization in high-energy storage rings. i. derivation of the equilibrium polariza- tion, Phys. Rev. A 36, 105 (1987)

    1987

  13. [21]

    L. H. Thomas, I. the kinematics of an electron with an axis, Phil. Mag. 3, 1 (1927)

    1927

  14. [22]

    Bargmann, L

    V. Bargmann, L. Michel, and V. L. Telegdi, Precession of the polarization of particles moving in a homogeneous electromagnetic field, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2, 435 (1959)

    1959

  15. [23]

    L. H. Thomas, Recollections of the discovery of the Thomas precessional frequency, AIP Conference Pro- ceedings 95, 4 (1983)

    1983

  16. [24]

    G. H. Hoffstaetter, High-Energy Polarized Proton Beams: A Modern View, Vol. 218 (2006)

    2006

  17. [25]

    M. G. Signorelli, Y. Cai, A. E. Connelly, G. Hoffstaet- ter, J. Kewisch, D. Marx, C. Montag, V. Ptitsyn, and S. Tepikian, Polarization preservation methods for the Electron Storage Ring of the EIC, JACoW IP AC2024, MOPC83 (2024)

    2024

  18. [26]

    horizontal-like

    so that the “horizontal-like” emittance corresponds to ϵa, and the “vertical-like” emittance to ϵb. After first 0 800 1600 2400 3200 4000 s [m] -1.8 -1.2 -0.6 0 0.6 1.2 Vertical Orbit [mm] Seed 1 Seed 2 Seed 3 Seed 4 Seed 5 Seed 6 Seed 7 Seed 8 Seed 9 Seed 10 FIG. 8. Vertical ...

  19. [27]

    D. P. Barber et al., High spin polarization at the HERA Electron Storage Ring, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 338, 166 (1994)

    1994

  20. [28]

    Forest, F

    E. Forest, F. Schmidt, and E. McIntosh, Introduction to the polymorphic tracking code: Fibre bundles, poly- morphic Taylor types and ”Exact tracking”, Tech. Rep. CERN-SL-2002-044-AP, KEK-REPORT-2002-3 (CERN, Geneva, 2002)

    2002

  21. [29]

    D. Sagan, Bmad: A relativistic charged particle simula- tion library, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detec- tors and Associated Equipment558, 356 (2006), proceed- ings of the 8th International Computational Accelerat...

    2006

  22. [30]

    M. G. Signorelli, Tao.jl, https://github.com/ bmad-sim/Tao.jl (2023)

    2023

  23. [31]

    Ptitsyn, Spin matching derivation (2021)

    V. Ptitsyn, Spin matching derivation (2021)

    2021

  24. [32]

    M. G. Signorelli and G. H. Hoffstaetter, Different forms of first order spin-orbit motion and their utility in spin matching in electron storage rings (2021)

    2021

  25. [33]

    Sagan and D

    D. Sagan and D. Rubin, Linear analysis of coupled lat- tices, Phys. Rev. ST Accel. Beams 2, 074001 (1999)

    1999

  26. [34]

    Ghojogh, F

    B. Ghojogh, F. Karray, and M. Crowley, Eigenvalue and generalized eigenvalue problems: Tutorial (2023), arXiv:1903.11240 [stat.ML]

    2023 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Wolski, Alternative approach to general coupled linear optics, Phys

    A. Wolski, Alternative approach to general coupled linear optics, Phys. Rev. ST Accel. Beams 9, 024001 (2006)

    2006

  28. [36]

    Sands, The Physics of Electron Storage Rings: An Introduction, Conf

    M. Sands, The Physics of Electron Storage Rings: An Introduction, Conf. Proc. C 6906161, 257 (1969)

    1969

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.