MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2317444538 · doi:10.1103/physrevc.86.041305

Improving systematic predictions of<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mi>β</mml:mi></mml:math>-delayed neutron emission probabilities

2012· article· en· W2317444538 on OpenAlexaff
E. A. McCutchan, A. A. Sonzogni, Timothy D. Johnson, D. Abriola, M. Birch, B. Singh

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review C · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstronomical and nuclear sciences
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsNeutronPhysicsEnergy (signal processing)BETA (programming language)Neutron emissionNuclear physicsParticle physicsNeutron temperatureComputer scienceQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The probability ${P}_{n}$ of emitting a neutron following $\ensuremath{\beta}$ decay is critical in many areas of nuclear science, from understanding nucleosynethesis during the $r$ process to control of reactor power levels and nuclear waste management. As it is not always easy to measure or calculate, indirect empirical approaches have been developed to estimate the ${P}_{n}$ value from the decay ${Q}_{\ensuremath{\beta}}$ value and the neutron separation energy S${}_{n}$. Here, we present a new prescription incorporating also the half-life ${T}_{1/2}$, which correlates the known data better and thus improves an estimation of ${P}_{n}$ when only ${T}_{1/2}$, ${Q}_{\ensuremath{\beta}}$, and S${}_{n}$ are known. This new relation can be used to predict ${P}_{n}$ values for cases where the half-life is known, thus it can be useful in $r$-process network calculations and in modeling advanced fuel cycles.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 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

Citations32
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review CSame topicAstronomical and nuclear sciencesFrench-language works237,207