Ozone: Unresolved discrepancies for dipole oscillator strength distributions, dipole sums, and van der Waals coefficients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dipole oscillator strength distributions (DOSDs) for ozone are constructed from experimental photoabsorption cross-sections combined with constraints provided by the Kuhn-Reiche-Thomas sum rule, the high-energy behavior of the dipole-oscillator-strength density, and molar refractivity data. A lack of photoabsorption data in the intermediate energy region from 24 to 524 eV necessitates the use of a mixture rule in that region. For this purpose, a DOSD for O(2) is constructed first. The dipole properties for O(2) are essentially the same as those obtained in earlier work even though most of the input data is from more recent experiments. A discrepancy is found between the refractivity data and photoabsorption data in the 10-20.6 eV range for ozone. A reliable ozone DOSD of the sort obtained for many other species remains out of reach. However, it is suggested that the true dipole properties of ozone lie between those predicted by two distributions that we present.
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 | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".