MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030441048 · doi:10.1103/physrevc.67.044313

Gamow-Teller strength distributions in<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow/><mml:mrow><mml:mn>76</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ge</mml:mi></mml:math>and<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow/><mml:mrow><mml:mn>76</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Se</mml:mi></mml:math>from deformed quasiparticle random-phase approximation

2003· article· lv· W2030441048 on OpenAlexfundno aff
P. Sarriguren, E. Moya de Guerra, L. Pacearescu, Amand Faessler, F. Šimkovic, A. A. Râduţâ

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review C · 2003
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear physics research studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinisterio de Ciencia y TecnologíaDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftMcMaster University
KeywordsPairingQuasiparticlePhysicsResidualRandom phase approximationAtomic physicsQuantum mechanicsAlgorithmComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study Gamow-Teller strength distributions of ${}^{76}\mathrm{Ge}$ and ${}^{76}\mathrm{Se}$ within a deformed quasiparticle random-phase approximation formalism, which includes residual spin-isospin forces in the particle-hole and particle-particle channels. We consider two different methods to construct the quasiparticle basis, a self-consistent approach based on a deformed Hartree-Fock calculation with density-dependent Skyrme forces and a more phenomenological approach based on a deformed Woods-Saxon potential. Both methods contain pairing correlations in the BCS approach. We discuss the sensitivity of Gamow-Teller strength distributions to the deformed mean field and residual interactions.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.003

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations31
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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