Nonresonant corrections and limits for the accuracy of the frequency measurements in modern hydrogen experiments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The theory of the nonresonant corrections, defining the limits of accuracy for the frequency measurements in resonance experiments, is generalized to the situation when the excitation of an atomic state is governed by one Hamiltonian Ĥin and the decay of the excited state is governed by another Hamiltonian Ĥout. The description developed here corresponds to the experimental conditions realized in most accurate modern resonance-frequency measurements of the 2s–1s transition in hydrogen. Two different variants of the theoretical description of the resonance experiments, referred to as "statistical" and "coherent" scenarios, are discussed. The criterion of how to define which scenario should be attributed to a particular resonance experiment is shown. The in and (or) out quantum electrodynamic formalism referring to different asymptotic Hamiltonians is applied. A value of 10–5 Hz, obtained for the accuracy limit in the 1s–2s experiment within the "coherent" scenario, is not so far from the accuracy already achieved experimentally (46 Hz). The accuracy limits for the Lyman-alpha frequency measurements for a "coherent" type of experiment are also obtained and shown to be comparable with recent experimental accuracy.PACS Nos.: 06.20.Jr, 31.10.+z, 32.30Bv
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 | 0.009 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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".