MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086165034 · doi:10.1103/physrevc.70.044602

Multiplicity distributions of intermediate mass fragments in the thermodynamic model

2004· article· en· W2086165034 on OpenAlexaff
S. Das Gupta

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review C · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicHigh-Energy Particle Collisions Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultiplicity (mathematics)Poisson distributionStatistical physicsPhysicsPopulationMathematicsStatisticsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multiplicity distributions of intermediate mass fragments (IMFs) seen in intermediate energy heavy ion collisions have been of great interest in the last ten years. The distributions of single intermediate sized elements are close to Poissonian and have been subjected to widely different physical interpretations. We calculate the multiplicity distributions in a thermodynamic model whose physical basis is equal populations in phase space, which implies equilibrium statistics. We found distributions of a single element are to a good approximation Poissonian, and this result is attributed to the small emission probability of a given IMF among all the possible channels. We also found significant deviation from a Poisson distribution for a range of IMFs, and suggest strong correlations as an explanation. The systematics of the multiplicity distributions are explored in both one-component and two-component models. In the one-component model, sudden changes for the multiplicity distributions are found at the phase transition region. In the two-component model, the multiplicity distributions have more subtleties. Results from the current model are compared with available data, and good agreements are found. New signals for the multiparticle correlations are also suggested.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.813
Threshold uncertainty score0.243

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.324 · 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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review CSame topicHigh-Energy Particle Collisions ResearchFrench-language works237,207