Spectroscopy of <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mmultiscripts><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Kr</mml:mi><mml:mprescripts/><mml:none/><mml:mn>70</mml:mn></mml:mmultiscripts></mml:math> and isospin symmetry in the <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mi> </mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mi>g</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math> shell nuclei
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The recoil-$\ensuremath{\beta}$ tagging technique has been used in conjunction with the $^{40}\mathrm{Ca}(^{32}\mathrm{S},2n)$ reaction at a beam energy of 88 MeV to identify transitions associated with the decay of the ${2}^{+}$ and, tentatively, ${4}^{+}$ states in the nucleus $^{70}\mathrm{Kr}$. These data are used, along with previously published data, to examine the triplet energy differences (TED) for the mass 70 isobars. The experimental TED values are compared with shell model calculations, performed with the JUN45 interaction in the $fpg$ model space, that include a $J=0$ isospin nonconserving (INC) interaction with an isotensor strength of 100 keV. The agreement is found to be very good up to spin 4 and supports the expectation for analog states that all three nuclei have the same oblate shape at low-spin. The $A=70$ results are compared with the experimental and shell model predicted TED and mirror energy differences (MED) for the mass 66 and 74 systems. The comparisons clearly demonstrate the importance of the isotensor INC interaction in replicating the TED data in this region. Issues related to the observed MED values and their interpretation within the shell model are discussed.
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 | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.249 | 0.010 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".