MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016728516 · doi:10.1103/physrevc.77.065805

Semi-classical equation of state and specific-heat expressions with proton shell corrections for the inner crust of a neutron star

2008· article· en· W2016728516 on OpenAlexaff
M. Onsi, A. K. Dutta, H. Chatri, S. Goriely, N. Chamel, John Pearson

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review C · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsNeutron starNuclear matterProtonEquation of stateNeutronNuclear physicsShell (structure)Quantum electrodynamicsQuantum mechanicsNucleon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An approach to the equation of state for the inner crust of neutron stars based on Skyrme-type forces is presented. Working within the Wigner-Seitz picture, the energy is calculated by the TETF (temperature-dependent extended Thomas-Fermi) method, with proton shell corrections added self-consistently by the Strutinsky-integral method. Using a Skyrme force that has been fitted to both neutron matter and to essentially all the nuclear mass data, we find strong proton shell effects: proton numbers $Z=50,40$, and 20 are the only values possible in the inner crust, assuming that nuclear equilibrium is maintained in the cooling neutron star right down to the ambient temperature. Convergence problems with the TETF expansion for the entropy, and our way of handling them, are discussed. Full TETF expressions for the specific heat of inhomogeneous nuclear matter are presented. Our treatment of the electron gas, including its specific heat, is essentially exact, and is described in detail.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.316 · 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

Citations88
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review CSame topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves ResearchFrench-language works237,207