MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085624764 · doi:10.1063/1.1828032

Quantum trajectories in elastic atom-surface scattering: Threshold and selective adsorption resonances

2004· article· en· W2085624764 on OpenAlexaff
Ángel S. Sanz, S. Miret‐Artés

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum Mechanics and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuantumScatteringPhysicsAtom opticsWave functionQuantum mechanicsClassical mechanicsQuantum opticsFormalism (music)Atom (system on chip)Trapping

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The elastic resonant scattering of He atoms off the Cu(117) surface is fully described with the formalism of quantum trajectories provided by Bohmian mechanics. Within this theory of quantum motion, the concept of trapping is widely studied and discussed. Classically, atoms undergo impulsive collisions with the surface, and then the trapped motion takes place covering at least two consecutive unit cells. However, from a Bohmian viewpoint, atom trajectories can smoothly adjust to the equipotential energy surface profile in a sort of sliding motion; thus the trapping process could eventually occur within one single unit cell. In particular, both threshold and selective adsorption resonances are explained by means of this quantum trapping considering different space and time scales. Furthermore, a mapping between each region of the (initial) incoming plane wave and the different parts of the diffraction and resonance patterns can be easily established, an important issue only provided by a quantum trajectory formalism.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 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

Citations33
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicQuantum Mechanics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207