MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1593468137

INFLUENCE OF THE COULOMB FIELD ON CHARGED PARTICLE EMISSION IN Ar + Ni REACTION AT 77 MeV/u

2004· article· en· W1593468137 on OpenAlexaff
K. Wosińska, J. Pluta, F. Hanappe, L. Stuttgé, J. C. Angélique, Z. Basrak, B. Benoit, E. de Goès Brennand, G. Bizard, J. Colin, G. Costa, P. Désesquelles, O. Dorvaux, D. Durand, B. Erazmus, S. Kuleshov, R. Lednický, P. Leszczyński, Miguel A. L. Marques, T. Materna, K. Mikhailov, G. Papatheofanous, T. Pawlak, M. Przewłocki, A. Staranowicz, A. Stavinskiy, A. Sztenkiel, B. Tamain, A.V. Vlasov, L. Vorobyev

Bibliographic record

VenueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe) · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear Physics and Applications
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nautical Research Society
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsCharged particleNeutronProtonNuclear physicsCoulombDetectorAtomic physicsSpectral lineProton emissionCharge (physics)IonElectronParticle physicsOptics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ar+Ni collisions at 77 MeV/u were studied in the experiment E286 performed at GANIL. An important advantage of this experiment was an application of the neutron detector DEMON for registration of both neutral and charged particles. This feature allows to compare characteristics of neutrons and protons detected by the same detector and gives a possibility to determine the influence of the Coulomb field on the proton emission. Estimation of a charge of the emitting source was performed by comparing energy spectra of neutrons and protons detected under identical experimental conditions. The experimental results were compared with the prediction of the SIMON model [D. Durand, Nucl. Phys. A541, 266 (1992)] and Landau-Vlasov model [Z. Basrak, Ph. Eudes, P. Abgrall, F. Haddad. F. Sébille, Nucl, Phys. A624, 472 (1997)].

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.442
Threshold uncertainty score0.278

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe)Same topicNuclear Physics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207