MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2511589701 · doi:10.1139/cjp-2016-0236

Energies and radiative transitions (E1, E2, and M1) for hydrogen-like thorium

2016· article· en· W2511589701 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Güldem Ürer

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Molecular Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAtomic physicsRadiative transferRelativistic quantum chemistryHydrogenThoriumDirac equationIonPauli exclusion principleWork (physics)Dirac (video compression format)Quantum numberQuantum mechanicsNuclear physicsNeutrino

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hydrogen-like ions with high Z present unique opportunities to promote the understanding of atomic structure. On the other hand, determining the atomic structure of hydrogen-like atoms provides us the test of relativistic effects as well as accurate values of the spectral characteristics required for many applications. For this reason we have calculated level energies of hydrogen like thorium (Th 89+ , Z = 90) with both multiconfiguration Hartree–Fock (MCHF) and multiconfiguration Dirac–Fock (MCDF) methods. These calculations have contained the Breit–Pauli relativistic corrections in MCHF calculation and quantum electrodynamics effects in MCDF calculations besides electron correlations. The wavelengths, λ, weighted oscillator strengths, gf-value, and transition probabilities, A ki , have been also represented for allowed (E1) and forbidden (E2 and M1) transitions. We have compared our results with only theoretical work results because there is no available experimental data for Th 89+ .

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 score0.301
Threshold uncertainty score0.357

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicAtomic and Molecular PhysicsFrench-language works237,207