MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1535564063 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/752/1/69

THE BORON-TO-CARBON ABUNDANCE RATIO AND GALACTIC PROPAGATION OF COSMIC RADIATION

2012· article· en· W1535564063 on OpenAlexaff
Andreas Obermeier, P. Boyle, J.R. Hörandel, D. Müller

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Therapy and Dosimetry
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersStichting voor Fundamenteel Onderzoek der MaterieNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsCosmic rayPhysicsAstrophysicsLambdaExponentPower lawNatural abundanceGalaxyIsotopes of boronPath lengthSpectral lineEnergy (signal processing)Attenuation lengthComputational physicsBoronNuclear physicsAstronomyOpticsStatisticsIsotope

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In two long-duration balloon flights in 2003 and 2006, the TRACER cosmic-ray detector has measured the energy spectra and the absolute intensities of the cosmic-ray nuclei from boron ( Z = 5) to iron ( Z = 26) up to very high energies. In particular, the second flight has led to results on the energy spectrum of the secondary boron nuclei, and on the boron abundance relative to that of the heavier primary parent nuclei, commonly quantified as the "B/C abundance ratio." The energy dependence of this ratio, now available up to about 2 TeV amu −1 , provides a measure for the energy dependence of cosmic-ray propagation through the Galaxy, and for the shape of the cosmic-ray source energy spectrum. We use a Leaky-Box approximation of cosmic-ray propagation to obtain constraints on the relevant parameters on the basis of the results of TRACER and of other measurements. This analysis suggests that the source energy spectrum is a relatively soft power law in energy E −α , with spectral exponent α = 2.37 ± 0.12, and that the propagation path length Λ( E ) is described by a power law in energy with exponent δ = 0.53 ± 0.06, but may assume a constant residual value Λ 0 at high energy. The value of Λ 0 is not well constrained but should be less than about 0.8 g cm −2 . Finally, we compare the data with numerical solutions of a diffusive reacceleration model, which also indicates a soft source spectrum.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations53
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicRadiation Therapy and DosimetryFrench-language works237,207