MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012016846 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.85.114045

Near-BPS Skyrmions: Nonshell configurations and Coulomb effects

2012· article· en· W2012016846 on OpenAlexaff
Éric Bonenfant, Louis Harbour, Luc Marleau

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D, Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Molecular Physics
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSkyrmionCoulombPhysicsQuantum electrodynamicsCondensed matter physicsQuantum mechanicsElectron

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relatively small binding energy in nuclei suggests that they may be well represented by near-BPS Skyrmions since their mass is roughly proportional to the baryon number $A$. For that purpose, we propose a generalization of the Skyrme model with terms up to order six in derivatives of the pion fields and treat the nonlinear $\ensuremath{\sigma}$ and Skyrme terms as small perturbations. For our special choice of mass term (or potential) $V$, we obtain well-behaved analytical BPS-type solutions with nonshell configurations for the baryon density, as opposed to the more complex shell-like configurations found in most extensions of the Skyrme model. Along with static and (iso)rotational energies, we add to the mass of the nuclei the often neglected Coulomb energy and isospin breaking term. Fitting the four model parameters, we find a remarkable agreement for the binding energy per nucleon $B/A$ with respect to experimental data. These results support the idea that nuclei could be near-BPS Skyrmions.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.308 · 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

Citations37
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D, Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmologySame topicAtomic and Molecular PhysicsFrench-language works237,207