MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035187570 · doi:10.1142/s0217751x05029666

ISOTOPIC COMPOSITION OF COSMIC RAYS: RESULTS FROM THE COSMIC RAY ISOTOPE SPECTROMETER ON THE ACE SPACECRAFT

2005· article· en· W2035187570 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M. H. Israel

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Modern Physics A · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear Physics and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsCosmic raySupernovaNucleosynthesisAstrophysicsAstronomyGalaxyInterstellar mediumEjectaSolar SystemCosmic ray spallationPAMELA detectorUltra-high-energy cosmic ray

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past seven years the Cosmic Ray Isotope Spectrometer (CRIS) on the ACE spacecraft has returned data with an unprecedented combination of excellent mass resolution and high statistics, describing the isotopic composition of elements from lithium through nickel in the energy interval ~ 50 to 500 MeV/nucleon. These data have demonstrated: * The time between nucleosynthesis and acceleration of the cosmic-ray nuclei is at least 10 5 years. The supernova in which nucleosynthesis takes place is thus not the same supernova that accelerates a heavy nucleus to cosmic-ray energy. * The mean confinement time of cosmic rays in the Galaxy is 15 Myr. * The isotopic composition of the cosmic-ray source is remarkably similar to that of solar system. The deviations that are observed, particularly at 22 Ne and 58 Fe , are consistent with a model in which the cosmic-ray source is OB associations in which the interstellar medium has solar-system composition enriched by roughly 20% admixture of ejecta from Wolf-Rayet stars and supernovae. * Cosmic-ray secondaries that decay only by electron capture provide direct evidence for energy loss of cosmic rays as they penetrate the solar system. This invited overview paper at ECRS 19 was largely the same as an invited paper presented a month earlier at the 8th Nuclei in the Cosmos Conference in Vancouver. The proceedings of that conference will be published shortly by Elsevier as a special edition of Nuclear Physics A. For further summary of results from CRIS, the reader is referred to URL 〈〉 and links on that page to CRIS and to Science News.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.343
Threshold uncertainty score0.360

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.258
Teacher spread0.240 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Modern Physics ASame topicNuclear Physics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207