MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967891462 · doi:10.1139/p02-032

Identical nuclei in coherent pion production at intermediate energies

2002· article· en· W1967891462 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
P. A. Deutchman

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear physics research studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsPionAmplitudeNucleonNuclear physicsProjectileIntermediate stateFormalism (music)Atomic physicsParticle physicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The formalism for the calculation of constructive, coherent production of pions through the collision of intermediate-energy nuclei now includes for the first time the exchange symmetry due to identical nuclei both in the initial two-body state and in the final three-body state. Of the eight terms that contribute to the pion-energy distributions, four of the amplitudes are equal in pairs, effectively leaving four amplitudes with direct terms in the initial state and direct and exchange terms in the final state. Of these remaining amplitudes, the final-state exchange terms are negligible as far as the calculation is concerned. This holds for pion-energy distributions over the incident energies from 100 MeV/nucleon to 2 GeV/nucleon for pions fixed in the forward direction (θπ = 0°) and the projectile and target, respectively, fixed in the fore and aft directions. This work is also generalized to include schematic solutions for the cases of identical nuclei in the initial state only, identical nuclei in the final state only, and the case of no identical nuclei at all. PACS Nos.: 24.10Cn, 24.30Cz, 25.70-z, 25.80-e

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.227 · 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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicNuclear physics research studiesFrench-language works237,207