MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2567492590 · doi:10.5539/apr.v9n1p70

Presentation of Dark Matter Candidates

2017· article· en· W2567492590 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSpace Science and Extraterrestrial Life
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDark matterHydrogen atomPhysicsAtomic physicsHydrogenDark energyElectronAstrophysicsNuclear physicsQuantum mechanicsCosmology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The hydrogen atom has ultra-low energy levels. This paper calls hydrogen atoms at these energy levels “dark hydrogen atoms.” A dark hydrogen atom is formed from a proton with positive mass, and an electron with negative mass. This paper claims that, if the interpretation of triplet production is changed, then the existence of electrons forming dark hydrogen has already been indirectly demonstrated. The radius of dark matter (DM), exemplified by the dark hydrogen atom, is extremely small. However, this matter can exist in a state of high density, and thus can act as a tremendous source of gravitational force, far greater than ordinary matter. This paper predicts that dark atoms, dark molecules, and various types of DM combining such particles are the true nature of the unknown mass (source of gravitational force).

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.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.382
Threshold uncertainty score0.644

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.325 · 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