MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089200154 · doi:10.1088/2041-8205/729/2/l20

ASSIGNMENT OF 5069 Å DIFFUSE INTERSTELLAR BAND TO HC <sub>4</sub> H <sup>+</sup> : DISAGREEMENT WITH LABORATORY ABSORPTION BAND

2011· article· en· W2089200154 on OpenAlexaff
John P. Maier, Satrajit Chakrabarty, Fabio Mazzotti, Corey A. Rice, Rainer Dietsche, G. A. H. Walker, D. Bohlender

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Letters · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbsorption (acoustics)Atomic physicsExcitationPhysicsWavelengthInterstellar mediumAbsorption bandGround stateDispersion (optics)Absorption spectroscopyIonAstrophysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Krełowski et al. have reported a weak, diffuse interstellar band (DIB) at 5069 Å which appears to match in both mid-wavelength and width the A 2 Π u – X 2 Π g gas-phase origin absorption band of HC 4 H + . Here, we present laboratory rotational profiles at low temperatures which are then compared with the 5069 Å DIB using ∼0.1 and 0.3 Å line widths based on a realistic line-of-sight interstellar velocity dispersion. Neither the band shape nor the wavelength of the maximum absorption match, which makes the association of the 5069 Å DIB with HC 4 H + unlikely. The magnetic dipole transition X 2 Π g Ω = 1/2→ X 2 Π g Ω = 3/2 within the ground electronic state which competes with collisional excitation is also considered. In addition, we present the laboratory gas-phase spectrum of the A 2 Π u – X 2 Π g transition of HC 4 H + measured at 25 K in an ion trap and identify further absorption bands at shorter wavelengths for comparison with future DIB data.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0030.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.168 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations24
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal LettersSame topicAtmospheric Ozone and ClimateFrench-language works237,207