MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Inverse Kinematic Study of the<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mmultiscripts><mml:mrow><mml:mi>Al</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mprescripts/><mml:none/><mml:mrow><mml:mn>26</mml:mn><mml:mi>g</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mmultiscripts><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo><mml:mmultiscripts><mml:mrow><mml:mi>Al</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mprescripts/><mml:none/><mml:mrow><mml:mn>27</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mmultiscripts></mml:mrow></mml:math>Reaction and Implications for Destruction of<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mmultiscripts><mml:mrow><mml:mi>Al</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mprescripts/><mml:none/><mml:mrow><mml:mn>26</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mmultiscripts></mml:mrow></mml:math>in Wolf-Rayet and Asymptotic Giant Branch Stars

2015· article· lv· W1942631512 on OpenAlexaff
V. Margerin, G. Lotay, P. J. Woods, M. Aliotta, G. Christian, B. Davids, T. Davinson, D. T. Doherty, J. Fallis, Debra Howell, O. S. Kirsebom, D. J. Mountford, A. Rojas, C. Ruiz, J. A. Tostevin

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2015
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear physics research studies
Canadian institutionsTRIUMF
FundersScience and Technology Facilities Council
KeywordsComputer scienceAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Wolf-Rayet and asymptotic giant branch (AGB) stars, the $^{26g}\mathrm{Al}(p,\ensuremath{\gamma})^{27}\mathrm{Si}$ reaction is expected to govern the destruction of the cosmic $\ensuremath{\gamma}$-ray emitting nucleus $^{26}\mathrm{Al}$. The rate of this reaction, however, is highly uncertain due to the unknown properties of key resonances in the temperature regime of hydrogen burning. We present a high-resolution inverse kinematic study of the $^{26g}\mathrm{Al}(d,p)^{27}\mathrm{Al}$ reaction as a method for constraining the strengths of key astrophysical resonances in the $^{26g}\mathrm{Al}(p,\ensuremath{\gamma})^{27}\mathrm{Si}$ reaction. In particular, the results indicate that the resonance at ${E}_{r}=127\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{keV}$ in $^{27}\mathrm{Si}$ determines the entire $^{26g}\mathrm{Al}(p,\ensuremath{\gamma})^{27}\mathrm{Si}$ reaction rate over almost the complete temperature range of Wolf-Rayet stars and AGB stars.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0940.024

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations36
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review Letters→Same topicNuclear physics research studies→French-language works237,207→