MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999908455 · doi:10.1139/p07-127

Cometary X-ray emission: theoretical cross sections following charge exchange by multiply charged ions of astrophysical interest

2008· article· en· W1999908455 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
S. Otranto, R. E. Olson, P. Beiersdörfer

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Molecular Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFusion Energy SciencesLawrence Livermore National LaboratoryNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsPhysicsCharge exchangeIonCometProjectileAtomic physicsMonte Carlo methodNuclear physicsCharge (physics)Astrophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The classical trajectory Monte Carlo (CTMC) method is used to calculate emission cross sections following charge exchange collisions involving highly charged ions of astrophysical interest and typical cometary targets. Comparison is made to experimental data obtained on the EBIT machine at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) for O8+ projectiles impinging on different targets at a collision energy of 10 eV/amu. The theoretical cross sections are used together with ion abundances measured by the Advanced Composition Explorer as well as those obtained by a fitting procedure using laboratory emission cross sections to reproduce the X-ray spectrum of comet C/LINEAR S4 measured on 14 July 2001.PACS Nos.: 34.70+e, 32.30.Rj, 32.70.Fw, 95.30.Ky

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations8
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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