MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2339604878 · doi:10.1103/physrevc.94.054005

Quantum Monte Carlo calculations of two neutrons in finite volume

2016· article· en· W2339604878 on OpenAlexafffund
P. Klos, J. E. Lynn, Ingo Tews, Stefano Gandolfi, Alexandros Gezerlis, H.‐W. Hammer, Martin Hoferichter, A. Schwenk

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. C · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear physics research studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNational Science FoundationEuropean Research CouncilLos Alamos National LaboratoryNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsExcited stateDiffusion Monte CarloPhysicsQuantum Monte CarloMonte Carlo methodStatistical physicsObservableGround stateNeutronField (mathematics)Ab initioQuantum mechanicsMonte Carlo molecular modelingMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ab initio calculations provide direct access to the properties of pure neutron systems that are challenging to study experimentally. In addition to their importance for fundamental physics, their properties are required as input for effective field theories of the strong interaction. In this work, we perform auxiliary-field diffusion Monte Carlo calculations of the ground state and first excited state of two neutrons in a finite box, considering a simple contact potential as well as chiral effective field theory interactions. We compare the results against exact diagonalizations and present a detailed analysis of the finite-volume effects, whose understanding is crucial for determining observables from the calculated energies. Using the L\"uscher formula, we extract the low-energy $S$-wave scattering parameters from ground- and excited-state energies for different box sizes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.205
Threshold uncertainty score0.418

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.342 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations24
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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