[Acc_sem_comm] Seminar proposal

Fanglei Lin fanglei at jlab.org
Wed Jun 10 09:10:11 EDT 2020


I support it !

Thanks,
Fanglei
________________________________
From: Acc_sem_comm <acc_sem_comm-bounces at jlab.org> on behalf of Dennis Turner <dturner at jlab.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2020 9:05 AM
To: Gianluigi Ciovati <gciovati at jlab.org>; Acc_Sem_Comm at jlab.org <Acc_Sem_Comm at jlab.org>
Subject: Re: [Acc_sem_comm] Seminar proposal

Yes, please!

________________________________
From: Acc_sem_comm <acc_sem_comm-bounces at jlab.org> on behalf of Gianluigi Ciovati <gciovati at jlab.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2020 8:31 AM
To: Acc_Sem_Comm at jlab.org <Acc_Sem_Comm at jlab.org>
Subject: [Acc_sem_comm] Seminar proposal

Dear all,
I would like to propose Chris Tennant to give an Accelerator Seminar with the title and abstract below: do you agree?

Thanks,
Gigi



SRF Cavity Fault Classification Using Machine Learning at Jefferson Lab

We report on the development of machine learning models for classifying C100 superconducting radio-frequency (SRF) cavity faults in the Continuous Electron Beam Accelerator Facility (CEBAF) at Jefferson Lab. CEBAF is a continuous-wave recirculating linac utilizing 418 SRF cavities to accelerate electrons up to 12 GeV through 5-passes. Of these, 96 cavities (12 cryomodules) are designed with a digital low-level RF system configured such that a cavity fault triggers waveform recordings of 17 RF signals for each of the 8 cavities in the cryomodule. Subject matter experts (SME) are able to analyze the collected time-series data and identify which of the eight cavities faulted first and classify the type of fault. This information is used to find trends and strategically deploy mitigations to problematic cryomodules. However manually labeling the data is laborious and time-consuming. By leveraging machine learning, near real-time – rather than post-mortem – identification of the offending cavity and classification of the fault type has been implemented. We discuss performance of the ML models during a recent physics run. Results show the cavity identification and fault classification models have accuracies of 84.9% and 78.2%, respectively.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/acc_sem_comm/attachments/20200610/7a57d3b5/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Acc_sem_comm mailing list