MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Scattering of the halo nucleus<sup>11</sup>Li and its core<sup>9</sup>Li on<sup>208</sup>Pb at energies around the Coulomb barrier

2012· article· en· W1963895150 on OpenAlexaff
M. J. G. Borge, M. Cubero, J. P. Fernández-García, L. Acosta, M. Alcorta, M. A. G. Álvarez, L. Buchmann, C. Aa. Diget, H. Al Falou, Benjamin J. Fulton, H. O. U. Fynbo, D. Galaviz, J. Gómez‐Camacho, R. Kanungo, J. A. Lay, M. Madurga, I. Mukha, T. Nilsson, Á. M. Sánchez-Benítez, A.C. Shotter, O. Tengblad, P. Walden

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear physics research studies
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's UniversityTRIUMF
FundersScience and Technology Facilities Council
KeywordsCoulomb barrierHalo nucleusAtomic physicsHaloBreakupPhysicsScatteringElastic scatteringCoulombDipoleNucleusCore (optical fiber)Nuclear physicsElectronOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The first measurement of the elastic scattering of the halo nucleus 11 Li and its core 9 Li on 208 Pb at energies around the Coulomb barrier is presented. The 11 Li reaction showed a large cross section for the breakup channel, even at energies well below the barrier. The analysis of the 11 Li + 208 Pb scattering data in terms of the continuum-discretized coupled-channel calculations indicates that the effect of the coupling to the breakup channels produces a strong suppression of the elastic cross section at energies above and below the barrier. This effect is mainly due to the strong Coulomb coupling to the dipole states in the low-lying continuum of 11 Li.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicNuclear physics research studiesFrench-language works237,207