MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Measurement of Radiative Proton Capture on<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mmultiscripts><mml:mi mathvariant="bold">F</mml:mi><mml:mprescripts/><mml:none/><mml:mn>18</mml:mn></mml:mmultiscripts></mml:math>and Implications for Oxygen-Neon Novae

2013· article· lv· W2010437956 on OpenAlexaff
C. Akers, A. M. Laird, Benjamin J. Fulton, C. Ruiz, D. W. Bardayan, L. Buchmann, G. Christian, B. Davids, L. Erikson, J. Fallis, U. Hager, D.A. Hutcheon, L. Martin, A. St. J. Murphy, K. D. Nelson, A. Spyrou, C. Stanford, D. Ottewell, A. Rojas

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2013
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear physics research studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooMcMaster UniversityTRIUMF
FundersScience and Technology Facilities CouncilNational Science Foundation
KeywordsRadiative transferPhysicsResonance (particle physics)ObservableProtonAtomic physicsOrder (exchange)Nuclear physicsOpticsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rate of the 18F(p,γ)19Ne reaction affects the final abundance of the γ-ray observable radioisotope 18F, produced in novae. However, no successful measurement of this reaction exists and the rate used is calculated from incomplete information on the contributing resonances. Of the two resonances thought to play a significant role, one has a radiative width estimated from the assumed analogue state in the mirror nucleus, 19F. The second does not have an analogue state assignment at all, resulting in an arbitrary radiative width being assumed. Here, we report the first successful direct measurement of the 18F(p,γ)^19Ne reaction. The strength of the 665 keV resonance (Ex=7.076 MeV) is found to be over an order of magnitude weaker than currently assumed in nova models. Reaction rate calculations show that this resonance therefore plays no significant role in the destruction of ^{18}F at any astrophysical energy.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.899
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations19
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicNuclear physics research studiesFrench-language works237,207