MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043085932 · doi:10.1103/physreve.66.046415

Interaction of ions and ion clusters with a disordered electron gas: Collective and single-particle excitations

2002· article· en· W2043085932 on OpenAlexaff
Hrachya B. Nersisyan, A. K. Das, Hrant H. Matevosyan

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. E, Statistical physics, plasmas, fluids, and related interdisciplinary topics · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Molecular Physics
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsEquipartition theoremPhysicsIonAtomic physicsFermi gasQuasiparticleStopping powerElectronPlasmonDegenerate energy levelsParticle (ecology)ProjectileQuantum mechanicsMagnetic field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we report results on our theoretical studies of stopping power contributions from single-particle and plasmon excitations. We have introduced an equipartition ratio defined as the ratio of stopping contributions from plasmon and single-particle excitations, respectively. Within the linear response theory we have made a comprehensive investigation of this equipartition ratio for fast pointlike and extended projectile ions in a disordered electron gas; the latter is modeled by a degenerate electron gas of metallic densities and with disorder being incorporated within a relaxation-time approximation. As simple but useful examples of pointlike and extended projectiles we have considered proton and He+ ion, as well as diproton and He+ ion clusters. We present detailed and comparative results for the equipartition ratio corresponding to several values of the damping parameter which characterizes disorder in our model. The results are also compared, wherever applicable, with those for individual, i.e., uncorrelated projectiles.

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 score0.297
Threshold uncertainty score0.925

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations8
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. E, Statistical physics, plasmas, fluids, and related interdisciplinary topicsSame topicAtomic and Molecular PhysicsFrench-language works237,207