MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157396746 · doi:10.1126/science.1199421

Kinetic Isotope Effects for the Reactions of Muonic Helium and Muonium with H <sub>2</sub>

2011· article· en· W2157396746 on OpenAlexaff
Donald G. Fleming, Donald J. Arseneau, Oleksandr Sukhorukov, J. H. Brewer, Steven L. Mielke, George C. Schatz, Bruce C. Garrett, Kirk A. Peterson, Donald G. Truhlar

Bibliographic record

VenueScience · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuon and positron interactions and applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of AlbertaTRIUMF
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMuoniumMuonKinetic isotope effectExotic atomKinetic energyChemistryAtomic physicsReaction rate constantIsotopeHydrogenDeuteriumHeliumAtom (system on chip)ProtonHelium atomPhysicsNuclear physicsKinetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The neutral muonic helium atom may be regarded as the heaviest isotope of the hydrogen atom, with a mass of ~4.1 atomic mass units ((4.1)H), because the negative muon almost perfectly screens one proton charge. We report the reaction rate of (4.1)H with (1)H(2) to produce (4.1)H(1)H + (1)H at 295 to 500 kelvin. The experimental rate constants are compared with the predictions of accurate quantum-mechanical dynamics calculations carried out on an accurate Born-Huang potential energy surface and with previously measured rate constants of (0.11)H (where (0.11)H is shorthand for muonium). Kinetic isotope effects can be compared for the unprecedentedly large mass ratio of 36. The agreement with accurate quantum dynamics is quantitative at 500 kelvin, and variational transition-state theory is used to interpret the extremely low (large inverse) kinetic isotope effects in the 10(-4) to 10(-2) range.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations95
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScienceSame topicMuon and positron interactions and applicationsFrench-language works237,207