Comment on “Multiconfiguration Dirac–Fock energy levels and radiative rates for Br-like tungsten” by S. Aggarwal, A.K.S. Jha, and M. Mohan [Can. J. Phys. 91, 394 (2013)]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report calculations of energy levels and oscillator strengths for transitions in W XL, undertaken with the general-purpose relativistic atomic structure package (GRASP) and flexible atomic code (FAC). Comparisons are made with existing results and the accuracy of the data is assessed. Discrepancies with the most recent results of S. Aggarwal et al. (Can. J. Phys. 91, 394 (2013)) are up to 0.4 Ryd and up to two orders of magnitude for energy levels and oscillator strengths, respectively. Discrepancies for lifetimes are even larger, up to four orders of magnitude for some levels. Our energy levels are estimated to be accurate to better than 0.5% (i.e., 0.2 Ryd), whereas results for oscillator strengths and lifetimes should be accurate to better than 20%.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".