Prediction of alpha-decay energy and decay half-life for unknown superheavy nuclei using resonances of exactly solvable α+nucleus potential
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Predictions of the results of alpha-decay energy (Q-value) and decay half-life (t1/2) are made for experimentally unknown alpha decaying systems of superheavy nuclei. Following a theoretical method proposed recently by B. Sahu, the calculations are performed using the analytical expression of the potential that simulates the nuclear+Coulomb potential of the α + daughter nucleus system. The Q-value considered as resonance energy is calculated using the behavior of the wave function, and the t1/2 is expressed analytically using the exact solutions of the potential. A global formula for the potential parameter as a function of neutron number in a given isotopic chain of nuclei is developed for the calculation of Q and t1/2. Calculations of the latter two quantities are made for the decay chain of newly discovered superheavy elements 294117, 293117, and for the isotopic chains of Z = 74 and 102. Predictions of the same parameters are made for Z = 113 and some other still unknown superheavy nuclei. It is observed that the global formula works well in evaluating correct results of Q and t1/2 for various alpha emitters.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".