MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114694696 · doi:10.1103/physreve.83.036403

Number-conserving linear-response study of low-velocity ion stopping in a collisional magnetized classical plasma

2011· article· en· W2114694696 on OpenAlexaff
Hrachya B. Nersisyan, C. Deutsch, A. K. Das

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review E · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsPlasmaIonAtomic physicsMagnetic fieldStopping powerElectronRelaxation (psychology)DiffusionComputational physicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The results of a theoretical investigation of the low-velocity stopping power of ions in a magnetized collisional and classical plasma are reported. The stopping power for an ion is calculated through the linear-response (LR) theory. The collisions, which lead to a damping of the excitations in the plasma, are taken into account through a number-conserving relaxation time approximation in the LR function. In order to highlight the effects of collisions and magnetic field, we present a comparison of our analytical and numerical results obtained for nonzero damping or magnetic field with those for vanishing damping or magnetic field. It is shown that the collisions remove the anomalous friction obtained previously [Nersisyan et al., Phys. Rev. E 61, 7022 (2000)] for the collisionless magnetized plasmas at low ion velocities. One of the major objectives of this paper is to compare and to contrast our theoretical results with those obtained through a diffusion coefficient formulation based on the Dufty-Berkovsky relation evaluated for a magnetized one-component plasma modeled with target ions and electrons.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations11
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review ESame topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207