MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2341284187 · doi:10.1103/physrevc.94.014322

Sensitivities and correlations of nuclear structure observables emerging from chiral interactions

2016· article· en· W2341284187 on OpenAlexafffund
Angelo Calci, Robert Roth

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. C · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear physics research studies
Canadian institutionsTRIUMF
FundersNational Research Council CanadaBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsObservablePhysicsNuclear structureStatistical physicsNuclear physicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Starting from a set of different two- and three-nucleon interactions from chiral effective field theory, we use the importance-truncated no-core shell model for ab initio calculations of excitation energies as well as electric quadrupole $(E2)$ and magnetic dipole $(M1)$ moments and transition strengths for selected $p$-shell nuclei. We explore the sensitivity of the excitation energies to the chiral interactions as a first step towards and systematic uncertainty propagation from chiral inputs to nuclear structure observables. The uncertainty band spanned by the different chiral interactions is typically in agreement with experimental excitation energies, but we also identify observables with notable discrepancies beyond the theoretical uncertainty that reveal insufficiencies in the chiral interactions. For electromagnetic observables we identify correlations among pairs of $E2$ or $M1$ observables based on the ab initio calculations for the different interactions. We find extremely robust correlations for $E2$ observables and illustrate how these correlations can be used to predict one observable based on an experimental datum for the second observable. In this way we circumvent convergence issues and arrive at far more accurate results than any direct ab initio calculation. A prime example for this approach is the quadrupole moment of the first ${2}^{+}$ state in $^{12}\mathrm{C}$, which is predicted with an drastically improved accuracy.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Citations25
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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