Model¶
The developer's by-kind index: where each CORA aggregate's AMX content lives. It hosts no content of its own. Design-phase scaffold.
For the aggregate shapes see the architecture model and the per-BC modules.
| Aggregate (BC) | Where at AMX |
|---|---|
| Asset (Equipment) | the stage pages: Source, Sample, Detector |
| Computed / virtual axes (Equipment) | Source (EnergyAxis) |
| Capability, Method (Recipe) | Techniques |
| Enclosure (Enclosure) | the index (17-ID-A optics, 17-ID-B experiment) |
| Zone, Conduit, Policy (Trust); Actor (Access) | Governance |
| Subject (the crystal custody thread) | Governance (deferred, ROBOT-1) |
| Procedure, Recipe, Caution, Supply, Run, Campaign, Dataset, Decision | deferred (design-phase; see below) |
What this deployment graduates: nothing (and that is the finding)¶
AMX is a clean pure-reuse deployment, completing the NSLS-II MX pair as FMX's sibling. Its finding is that the MX vocabulary generalizes across a third independent beamline with no new modelling: the graduated Goniometer (single-omega micro-goniometer), the Camera (Eiger), the Monochromator (here vertical), the Mirror (tandem-deflection + KB), the Filter (BCU attenuator), the BeamStop, the EnergyDispersiveSpectrometer (Mercury), the FluxMonitor (Keithley), the TimingController (Zebra), and the graduated catalog PositionMonitor (presenting Sensor, distinct from FluxMonitor by measuring beam position rather than flux) all bind unchanged. The robot is one Positioner-presenting Asset, not a new Family (the i03 / 19-BM / FMX precedent).
FMX-vs-AMX differences¶
The 17-ID pair is not identical, and the differences exercise the modelling: AMX uses a vertical DCM (FMX horizontal), tandem-deflection mirrors (FMX a horizontal focusing mirror), an EMBL robot, and has no CRL transfocator and no on-axis backlight in source. Each is a per-Asset settings or device-presence difference, not a Family split; both beamlines bind the same Families.
Deliberately not here yet¶
This is a design-phase scaffold (descriptor + docs), mirroring FMX and the other NSLS-II beamlines. Left out on purpose:
- No catalog change. AMX graduates nothing and coins nothing. The three MX Methods (
mx_data_collection,grid_scan,sample_exchange) stay pending: AMX is their third consumer, which strengthens but does not coin them. Methods coin on a conduct-path (a deployment that runs them), not on a sighting count, which is why even at n=3 they defer (theenergy_scandiscipline; TECH-1). Coining them is a follow-on that needs an MX conduct-path scenario (event-sourced spine work), the genuine MX-graduation path. - The robot is not a Family. The EMBL sample-changing robot is one Positioner-presenting Asset, gated by a Clearance, loading a
Subject, vendor in a bound Model; not a new SampleChanger Family (the i03 / 19-BM precedent, ROBOT-1). - The autonomous loop and the Subject custody thread. The unattended exchange loop is a Procedure over the spine threaded through the
Subjectaggregate; deferred with i03 / FMX (ROBOT-1). - Sample cryo-cooling. The cold-gas cryostream is not exposed in the profile collection, so it is deferred (CRYO-1); it would bind
TemperatureController(the i03 cryostream precedent) when its PV is supplied. - The area detector PV. The Eiger is not exposed in the AMX profile collection; it is carried
Cameraconfirm-only (DET-1). - Operations and experiment views, integration scenarios, vendor Models. A runbook and registered Assets for a beamline CORA does not yet drive would be invention; they land when the design firms and the team confirms.