Trapping, reflection, and fragmentation in a classical model of atom-lattice collisions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A classical one-dimensional model of the collision of an atom of mass M with a cold, semi-infinite harmonic lattice comprised of identical atoms of mass m is considered. In the model, the interactions between the incident atom (adatom) and the lattice are described in terms of a truncated parabolic potential by which the adatom is harmonically bound to the lattice at short distances but evolves freely when its distance is larger than a critical length R(c). The dynamics of the adatom colliding with an infinitely cold lattice is studied as a function of the initial velocity of the adatom. In order to determine whether the colliding atom is bound or reflected from the lattice in the asymptotic time limit, "secondary" collision events in which the incident atom leaves and reenters the interaction zone of the lattice are carefully considered. It is demonstrated that secondary collisions anticipated to be important for heavy adatoms (mu=m/M<1) also occur in the case of light adatoms (mu > or = 1). It is shown that the neglect of secondary collisions leads to an underestimation of the lower energy bound for adatom reflection of roughly 10% for mu close to 1. By generalizing the model to allow for the breaking of lattice bonds, the phenomenon of collision-induced lattice fragmentation is investigated.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".