Can<i>Ab Initio</i>Theory Explain the Phenomenon of Parity Inversion in<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mmultiscripts><mml:mrow><mml:mi>Be</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mprescripts/><mml:none/><mml:mrow><mml:mn>11</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mmultiscripts></mml:mrow></mml:math>?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The weakly bound exotic ^{11}Be nucleus, famous for its ground-state parity inversion and distinct n+^{10}Be halo structure, is investigated from first principles using chiral two- and three-nucleon forces. An explicit treatment of continuum effects is found to be indispensable. We study the sensitivity of the ^{11}Be spectrum to the details of the three-nucleon force and demonstrate that only certain chiral interactions are capable of reproducing the parity inversion. With such interactions, the extremely large E1 transition between the bound states is reproduced. We compare our photodisintegration calculations to conflicting experimental data and predict a distinct dip around the 3/2_{1}^{-} resonance energy. Finally, we predict low-lying 3/2^{+} and 9/2^{+} resonances that are not or not sufficiently measured in experiments.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".