MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090323355 · doi:10.1063/1.4874062

Active target studies of the αp-process at CRIB

2014· article· en· W2090323355 on OpenAlexaff
D. Kahl, T. Hashimoto, N.N. Duy, S. Kubono, Hiroyuki Yamaguchi, D. N. Binh, A. A. Chen, S. Cherubini, S. Hayakawa, Junxian He, H. Ishiyama, N. Iwasa, L. H. Khiem, Y. K. Kwon, S. Michimasa, T. Nakao, S. Ota, T. Teranishi, H. Tokieda, Y. Wakabayashi, T. Yamada, Liying Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueAIP conference proceedings · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear Physics and Applications
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Particle PhysicsMcMaster University
FundersRIKENJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceUniversity of TokyoMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology
KeywordsPhysicsAtomic physicsHeliumDeuteriumNuclear physicsExplosive materialNuclear astrophysicsDetectorOpticsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The p-process is a sequence of (, p)(p, ) reactions important to the nuclear trajectory to higher masses in type I X-ray bursts. Specifically, the p-process is schematically pure helium-burning, and thus unlike pure hydrogen-burning processes, does not require slow + decays. Explosive helium burning is responsible for the observed short rise-times of X-ray bursts but ultimately gives way to the rp-process as the Coulomb barrier increases. Because the stellar reaction rates of these (, p) reactions are poorly known over the relevant astrophysical energies, we performed systematic studies of the 18 Ne(, p), 22 Mg(, p) and 30 S(, p) reactions at the Center for Nuclear Study (CNS) low-energy radioactive ion beam separator, called CRIB. We produce the radioactive beams in-flight and scan the center-of-mass energy down into the Gamow Window using a thick target in inverse kinematics. The helium target gas also serves as part of the detector system, an active target, which was newly designed for these measurements. The active target, which uses gas electron multiplier (GEM) foils, allows for higher beam injection rates than previous multi-sampling and tracking proportional counters (MSTPC). We present a summary of our recent results from these active target experiments at CRIB.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations12
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIP conference proceedingsSame topicNuclear Physics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207