MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103267442 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.77.054017

Quantization of the<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:math>and<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:math>Skyrmions

2008· article· lv· W2103267442 on OpenAlexaff
Jimmy Fortier, Luc Marleau

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D, Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology · 2008
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum Chromodynamics and Particle Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsNucleonDeuteriumParticle physicsEnergy (signal processing)LagrangianCrystallographyAtomic physicsMathematical physicsQuantum mechanicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose to set the Skyrme parameters ${F}_{\ensuremath{\pi}}$ and $e$ such that they reproduce the physical masses of the nucleon and the deuteron. We allow deformation using an axially symmetric solution and simulated annealing to minimize the total energy for the $B=1$ nucleon and $B=2$ deuteron. First we find that axial deformations are responsible for a significant reduction (factor of $\ensuremath{\approx}4$) of the rotational energy but also that it is not possible to get a common set of parameters ${F}_{\ensuremath{\pi}}$ and $e$ which would fit both nucleon and deuteron masses simultaneously at least for ${m}_{\ensuremath{\pi}}=138\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{MeV}$, 345 MeV and 500 MeV. This suggests that either ${m}_{\ensuremath{\pi}}&gt;500\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{MeV}$ or additional terms must be added to the Skyrme Lagrangian.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
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 score0.465
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.266 · 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.

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

Citations10
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D, Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmologySame topicQuantum Chromodynamics and Particle InteractionsFrench-language works237,207