MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994947147 · doi:10.1139/p07-012

Three-loop radiative corrections to Lamb shift and hyperfine splitting

2007· article· en· W1994947147 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Molecular Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftRussian Foundation for Basic ResearchNational Science Foundation
KeywordsLamb shiftRadiative transferHyperfine structurePhotonVacuum polarizationPolarization (electrochemistry)Electron

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider three-loop radiative corrections to the Lamb shift and hyperfine splitting. Corrections of order α3(Zα)5m are the largest still unknown contributions to the Lamb shift in hydrogen. We calculate radiative corrections to the Lamb shift and hyperfine splitting generated by the diagrams with insertions of one radiative photon and electron polarization loops in the graphs with two external photons. We also obtain corrections generated by the gauge-invariant sets of diagrams with two reducible radiative photon insertions in the electron line and a polarization operator insertion in one of the radiative photons, and diagrams with two reducible radiative photon insertions in the electron line and a polarization operator insertion in one of the external photons. Corrections to the Lamb shift and hyperfine splitting generated by the diagrams with insertions of the three-loop one-particle reducible diagrams with radiative photons in the electron line are calculated in the Yennie gauge.PACS Nos.: 12.20.Ds, 31.30.Jv, 32.10.Fn, 36.10.Dr

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)0.003
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations20
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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