MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974108417 · doi:10.1139/p10-067

Relativistic corrections to He I transition ratesThis paper was presented at the International Conference on Precision Physics of Simple Atomic Systems, held at École de Physique, les Houches, France, 30 May – 4 June, 2010.

2011· article· en· W1974108417 on OpenAlexaffvenue
D. C. Morton, Paul Moffatt, G. W. F. Drake

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Molecular Physics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WindsorHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAtomic physicsDipoleExcited stateHeliumWave functionSpin (aerodynamics)Effective nuclear chargeRelativistic quantum chemistryNuclear physicsQuantum mechanicsElectron

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relativistic corrections to the theoretical oscillator strengths of light elements such as helium are typically less than 0.1% and usually are ignored. However, they can be important for comparisons with the most accurate experiments, and they rapidly increase in magnitude with increasing nuclear charge. We have begun with the spin-forbidden electric-dipole transitions of neutral helium, using calculations consisting of (1) extremely accurate wave functions without relativistic corrections for both infinite and finite nuclear mass, (2) spin-changing matrix elements through the perturbations of the wave functions by the spin-orbit and spin-other-orbit Breit operators, (3) the use of pseudostates in the sums over all the intermediate states including the continuum, and (4) the inclusion as perturbers of the 1S0 and 3S1 states the pseudostates corresponding to the doubly excited npn′p 3P 0e and npn′p 1P 1e terms, respectively. As examples of these calculations, we present oscillator strengths for the transitions 1 1S0–2 3P1, 2 1S0–2 3P1, 2 3S1–2 1P1, 2 1P1–3 3D1,2, and 2 3P1,2–3 1D2.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations10
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicAtomic and Molecular PhysicsFrench-language works237,207