Elastic and inelastic collisions of<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow/><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi>Σ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math>molecules in a magnetic field
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We calculate the cross sections for elastic scattering and Zeeman relaxation in binary collisions of molecules in the rovibrational ground state of a ${}^{2}\ensuremath{\Sigma}$ electronic state and the Zeeman state with the electron spin projection ${M}_{S}=\frac{1}{2}$ on the magnetic field axis. This is the lowest-energy state of ${}^{2}\ensuremath{\Sigma}$ molecules confined in a magnetic trap. The results are averaged over calculations with multiple molecule-molecule interaction potentials, which yield the expectation intervals for the cross sections and the elastic-to-inelastic cross-section ratios. We find that the elastic-to-inelastic cross-section ratios under conditions corresponding to trapped molecular ensembles at $T\ensuremath{\sim}{10}^{\ensuremath{-}3}$ K exceed 100 for the majority of ${}^{2}\ensuremath{\Sigma}$ molecules. The range of ${}^{2}\ensuremath{\Sigma}$ molecules expected to be collisionally unstable in magnetic traps at $T<{10}^{\ensuremath{-}3}$ K is limited to molecules with the spin-rotation interaction constant ${\ensuremath{\gamma}}_{\mathrm{SR}}>0.5$ cm${}^{\ensuremath{-}1}$ and the rotational constant ${B}_{e}<4$ cm${}^{\ensuremath{-}1}$.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".