MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126822749 · doi:10.1139/p02-111

Progress in helium fine-structure calculations and the fine-structure constant

2002· article· en· W2126822749 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Molecular Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPhysicsRecoilFine-structure constantHeliumAtomic physicsConstant (computer programming)ElectronWork (physics)Order (exchange)Computational physicsNuclear physicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The long-term goal of this work is to determine the fine-structure constant α from a comparison between theory and experiment for the fine-structure splittings of the helium 1s2p 3 P J states. All known terms of order α 5 a.u. (α 7 mc 2 ) arising from the electron–electron interaction, and recoil corrections of order α 4 µ / M a.u. are evaluated and added to previous tabulation. The predicted energy splittings are ν 0,1 = 29 616.946 42(18) MHz and ν 1,2 = 2291.154 62(31) MHz. Although the computational uncertainty is much less than ±1 kHz, there is an unexplained discrepancy between theory and experiment of 19.4(1.4) kHz for ν 1,2 . PACS Nos.: 31.30Jv, 32.10Fn

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.150
Threshold uncertainty score0.438

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.194 · 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