MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164587939 · doi:10.1139/p01-060

Interpretation of the spectrum of Pb(II). Theoretical transition probabilities and lifetimes

2001· article· en· W2164587939 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
C. Colón, A. Alonso‐Medina

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Molecular Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAtomic physicsExcited stateAb initioRadiative transferConfiguration interactionCoupling (piping)DipoleInterpretation (philosophy)Ab initio quantum chemistry methodsQuantum mechanicsMolecule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Radiative transition probabilities for 190 lines arising from the ns 2 S 1/2 , np 2 P 1/2,3/2 , nd 2 D 3/2,5/2 , nf 2 F 5/2,7/2 , and 6p 2 ( 4 P 1/2,3/2,5/2 , 2 D 3/2,5/2 , 2 P 1/2,3/2 , and 2 S 1/2 ) levels of Pb(II) have been calculated. Lifetimes of the above mentioned levels have been determined from the present transition probabilities. These values were obtained in intermediate coupling (IC) and using ab initio relativistic Hartree-Fock calculations. For the IC calculations, we use the standard method of least-square fitting of experimental energy levels by means of computer codes from Cowan. The results of calculations for radiative transition probabilities and excited states lifetimes are presented and compared with the experimental results present in the literature and with other theoretical values. There is generally good agreement between our values and the experimental data available. Analysis of the interaction shows that the level 4 P 5/2 of the 6s6p 2 configuration presents a large contribution to the 2 D 5/2 level of the 6s 2 6d configuration. This result explains the good agreement between our result and the experimental values obtained to the observed as the 6s6p 2 4 P 5/2 – 6s 2 5f 2 F 7/2 dipole-forbidden transition. PACS Nos.: 32.70^*, 32.70Fw, 32.70Cs

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 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 score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.208

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations7
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicAtomic and Molecular PhysicsFrench-language works237,207