MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000635519 · doi:10.1063/1.2336430

Coherent control of collision processes: Penning versus associative ionization

2006· article· en· W2000635519 on OpenAlex

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum optics and atomic interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsIonizationAtomic physicsPhysicsCollisionSuperposition principleAtom (system on chip)Degenerate energy levelsRange (aeronautics)Penning ionizationAb initioComputationIonQuantum mechanicsComputer scienceMaterials scienceAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coherent control theory is applied to the control of Ne*(3s,(3)P2)+Ar((1)S0) collisions and computations are shown that display extensive control over these processes. Indeed we demonstrate that it is possible to essentially turn on and off the cross sections for both the Penning and associative ionization processes. This facility arises from the interference between matter waves induced by creating a linear superposition of the degenerate M={-2,-1,0,1,2} Zeeman sublevels of the Ne*(3s,(3)P2) target atom. The computations, conducted at collision energies in the 1-8 kcal/mole range, are based on combining, within the "rotating atom approximation," empirically derived and ab initio ionization widths.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.197

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.243 · 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