Pith. Sign in

RECORD

Comparison of Timing Properties of Glass Multigap RPCs with 0.3 and 0.6 mm Subgap Width

PaperPDF from arXiv

data files

Paper breakdownThe authors' claims, conditions and measurements, as JSON Signed receiptProof this review has not been altered
X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit Hacker News
V.Ammosov, V.Gapienko, A.Ivanilov, A.Semak, Yu.Sviridov, E.Usenko, V.Zaets

High Energy Physics - Experiment · Submitted 17 May 2002

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review

The authors' main claim The rate capability of the (2x0.6mm) counter was found to be considerably lower than for the (2x(2x0.3mm)) one.

how it is stated · asserted 1.00 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗
Cite ▾
arXiv IDhep-ex/0205061 (version 1)
Pith IDOHLHFVB5, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review
CitationA.Ivanilov, A.Semak, E.Usenko, V.Ammosov, V.Gapienko, V.Zaets, Yu.Sviridov. "Comparison of Timing Properties of Glass Multigap RPCs with 0.3 and 0.6 mm Subgap Width." arXiv:hep-ex/0205061 (2002). https://pith.science/paper/OHLHFVB5
Claim paper

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Open the compiled record

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 4,837 input tokens, $0.0002 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.03 · states limitation 0.64 · human participants 0.02 · controlled comparison 0.42 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.99 · compares with prior results 0.59 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; .

Timing characteristics of two multigap RPCs were compared. One had four subgaps 0.3 mm wide and the other - two subgaps 0.6 mm wide. Specially developed electronics was used. Electronics resolution convoluted with measured charge spectra at operating point was estimated as about 65 ps. The best time resolutions obtained at low counting rate were 75 ps for the 0.3 mm subgap and about 125 ps for the 0.6 mm one, after slewing corrections. The rate capability of the (2x0.6mm) counter was found to be considerably lower than for the (2x(2x0.3mm)) one.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#sentencerolethe authors' own workstates the main conclusionstrength
s0 Timing characteristics of two multigap RPCs were compared. contribution 0.96 0.84 0.04 asserted 0.98
s1 One had four subgaps 0.3 mm wide and the other - two subgaps 0.6 mm wide. method 0.82 0.60 0.04 asserted 0.99
s2 Specially developed electronics was used. method 1.00 0.62 0.02 asserted 0.97
s3 Electronics resolution convoluted with measured charge spectra at operating point was estimated as about 65 ps. result 0.71 0.88 0.05 asserted 0.91
s4 The best time resolutions obtained at low counting rate were 75 ps for the 0.3 mm subgap and about 125 ps for the 0.6 mm one, after slewing corrections. result 1.00 0.94 0.43 asserted 1.00
s5 The rate capability of the (2x0.6mm) counter was found to be considerably lower than for the (2x(2x0.3mm)) one. result 1.00 0.95 0.51 asserted 1.00

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: empirical study 1.00 · evidence from observation or experiment 1.00.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read
  • arXiv listing abstract v1
not examined
  • full text
  • figures and tables
  • references and citing sentences
  • relations to other papers
levels run
  • P abstract
not run
  • S sections
  • T body sentences
  • C citations
  • R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

The paper
Original abstract

Timing characteristics of two multigap RPCs were compared. One had four subgaps 0.3 mm wide and the other - two subgaps 0.6 mm wide. Specially developed electronics was used. Electronics resolution convoluted with measured charge spectra at operating point was estimated as about 65 ps. The best time resolutions obtained at low counting rate were 75 ps for the 0.3 mm subgap and about 125 ps for the 0.6 mm one, after slewing corrections. The rate capability of the (2x0.6mm) counter was found to be considerably lower than for the (2x(2x0.3mm)) one.

Human review

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

Discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.