MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1941054767 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.93.014306

Light atom quantum oscillations in UC and US

2016· article· en· W1941054767 on OpenAlexaff
Yuen Yiu, A. A. Aczel, G. E. Granroth, D. L. Abernathy, M. B. Stone, W. J. L. Buyers, Jiao Lin, German Samolyuk, G. M. Stocks, S. E. Nagler

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. B./Physical review. B · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicHigh-pressure geophysics and materials
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nuclear Laboratories
FundersBasic Energy SciencesSociedad Española de NefrologíaOffice of Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive ResearchU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsAnharmonicityPhysicsAtomic physicsScatteringAtom (system on chip)Hydrogen atomHarmonic oscillatorInelastic scatteringInelastic neutron scatteringQuantumCondensed matter physicsOpticsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High-energy vibrational scattering in the binary systems UC and US is measured using time-of-flight inelastic neutron scattering. A clear set of well-defined peaks equally separated in energy is observed in UC, corresponding to harmonic oscillations of the light C atoms in a cage of heavy U atoms. The scattering is much weaker in US and only a few oscillator peaks are visible. We show how the difference between the materials can be understood by considering the neutron scattering lengths and masses of the lighter atoms. Monte Carlo ray tracing is used to simulate the scattering, with near quantitative agreement with the data in UC, and some differences with US. The possibility of observing anharmonicity and anisotropy in the potentials of the light atoms is investigated in UC. Overall, the observed data is well accounted for by considering each light atom as a single atom isotropic quantum harmonic oscillator.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. B./Physical review. BSame topicHigh-pressure geophysics and materialsFrench-language works237,207