MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966581828 · doi:10.1080/00207390010010854

A quantum model of atoms (the energy levels of atoms)

2001· article· en· W1966581828 on OpenAlex
FranÇois Rafie

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum Mechanics and Applications
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBohr modelBohr radiusHydrogen atomMatter waveJumpElectronAtom (system on chip)PhysicsQuantum mechanicsAtomic physicsPrincipal quantum numberAtomic modelPhotonQuantumQuantum dissipation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1913, Niels Bohr developed an accurate model for the hydrogen atom. The mathematics involved and the simplicity of this model is easily understood. The intention of the paper is not to replace Bohr's model, but to find a similar model for all atoms. The model discussed, which was developed on the same basis as Bohr's model for the hydrogen atom, calculates the radii and the energies of the orbits. The wavelength of an emitted photon when an electron makes a ‘jump’ from a higher state to a lower state can also be calculated from the model. Finally, the paper demonstrates that the model obeys the de Broglie's hypothesis that the moving electron exhibits both wave and particle properties.

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.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.147

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.302 · 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