Anomalous Quasielastic Electron Scattering from Single<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math>,<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">D</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math>, and HD Molecules at Large Momentum Transfer: Indications of Nuclear Spin Effects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quasielectron electron scattering from gaseous ${\mathrm{H}}_{2}$, ${\mathrm{D}}_{2}$, a $50\ensuremath{\mathbin:}50$ mixture of ${\mathrm{H}}_{2}$ and ${\mathrm{D}}_{2}$, and HD is investigated with 2.25 keV impact energy and a momentum transfer $\ensuremath{\hbar}q$ of 19.7 a.u. The energy transfer is less than the dissociation energy. The spectral positions of the H and D recoil peaks agree with Rutherford scattering theory. Surprisingly, in the spectrum of the $50\ensuremath{\mathbin:}50$ ${\mathrm{H}}_{2}\mathrm{\text{\ensuremath{-}}}{\mathrm{D}}_{2}$ mixture, the integrated intensity of the H peak is $31%\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}4%$ lower (as compared to that of D) than predicted by Rutherford scattering, despite equal screening of nuclear charges by the electrons. In contrast, the ratio of scattering intensities from H and D in HD agrees with the predictions of Rutherford scattering. Comparison is made with neutron Compton scattering results from the same systems, but at higher energy transfers causing bond breaking. Possible theoretical explanations are outlined.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".