Specific heat and bimodality in canonical and grand canonical versions of the thermodynamic model
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We address two issues in the thermodynamic model for nuclear disassembly. Surprisingly large differences in results for specific heat were seen in predictions from the canonical and grand canonical ensembles when the nuclear system passes from liquid-gas coexistence to the pure gas phase. We are able to pinpoint and understand the reasons for such and other discrepancies when they appear. There is a subtle but important difference in the physics addressed in the two models. In particular if we reformulate the parameters in the canonical model to better approximate the physics addressed in the grand canonical model, calculations for observables converge. Next we turn to the issue of bimodality in the probability distribution of the largest fragment in both canonical and grand canonical ensembles. We demonstrate that this distribution is very closely related to average multiplicities. The relationship of the bimodal distribution to phase transition is discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it