Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this thesis the Mossbauer effect in metallic iron has been studied as a function of the length of time of diffusion of the Co⁵⁷ source into metallic iron, of the source temperature over the range 156°K to 478°K, and of the absorber thickness. In each case, the line shape, width, intensity and shifts were measured. Measurements showed that the appearance of an appreciable Mossbauer effect, .122, arises within the first ten minutes of diffusion time at 900°C in a hydrogen atmosphere and that additional time is required to reduce the line width and to increase the intensity to .145. The observed temperature shift of the resonantly absorbed 14.4 kev radiation followed that which was predicted by the Josephson effect. However, corrections for an isomer and a hydrostatic compression shift were made to the data before comparing the measured shift with the theoretical shift. The results indicated a Debye temperature of Θ[subscript D] = (420±20)°K for both the source and absorber used. The measurements made over the temperature range indicated that the internal magnetic field H̰ followed the saturation magnetization curve (the Weiss Law) closely. For small temperature differences between the source and absorber, ΔΘ < 50°K, measurements were made indicating that the minimum line width occurred at ΔΘ = 24°K. These results indicated that the internal magnetic field at ΔΘ = 0°K for the source was .01x10⁵oe greater than that of the absorber. For ΔΘ ≥ 100°K, the Mossbauer line displayed a hyperfine structure arising from the temperature dependent difference in the internal magnetic field at the nuclei. The line profile, width, shift and intensity were measured for four absorber thicknesses - .0002", .00035", .00055", and .001". The detailed comparison of these line characteristics with the theoretical values required an extension of existing treatments, a discussion of which is given in chapter five. In each case it was observed that the Mossbauer line was accompanied by two small peaks, one on either side of the main line. The position of these peaks indicated that they were associated with a small or zero internal magnetic field at the site of some of the Fe⁵⁷ atoms.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".