MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2236154080 · doi:10.1103/physrevc.87.054312

Structure of<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math>-shell nuclei using three-nucleon interactions evolved with the similarity renormalization group

2013· article· en· W2236154080 on OpenAlexafffund
Eric Jurgenson, Pieter Maris, R. J. Furnstahl, P. Navrátil, W. E. Ormand, James P. Vary

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review C · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear physics research studies
Canadian institutionsTRIUMF
FundersOak Ridge National LaboratoryLawrence Livermore National LaboratoryNational Research Council CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Energy Research Scientific Computing CenterTRIUMFU.S. Department of EnergyOffice of ScienceNational Science Foundation
KeywordsExtrapolationHamiltonian (control theory)PhysicsBasis (linear algebra)Ab initioStatistical physicsAlgorithmMathematicsQuantum mechanicsMathematical analysisGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The similarity renormalization group (SRG) is used to soften interactions for ab initio nuclear structure calculations by decoupling low- and high-energy Hamiltonian matrix elements. The substantial contribution of both initial and SRG-induced three-nucleon forces requires their consistent evolution in a three-particle basis space before applying them to larger nuclei. While, in principle, the evolved Hamiltonians are unitarily equivalent, in practice the need for basis truncation introduces deviations, which must be monitored. Here we present benchmark no-core full configuration calculations with SRG-evolved interactions in $p$-shell nuclei over a wide range of softening. These calculations are used to assess convergence properties, extrapolation techniques, and the dependence of energies, including four-body contributions, on the SRG resolution scale.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.567
Threshold uncertainty score0.617

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.5670.231

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.261 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations83
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review CSame topicNuclear physics research studiesFrench-language works237,207