MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Lowest<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mmultiscripts><mml:mrow><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mprescripts/><mml:none/><mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mmultiscripts></mml:mrow></mml:math>Electronic Excitations of the Boron Atom

2017· article· lv· W2581130297 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sergiy Bubin, Ludwik Adamowicz

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2017
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Molecular Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHumanities Research Group, University of WindsorNazarbayev UniversityUniversity of WindsorUniversity of ArizonaMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsWave functionAb initioAtomic physicsAlgorithmQuantum mechanicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A theoretical ab initio approach for calculating bound states of small atoms is developed and implemented. The approach is based on finite-nuclear-mass [non-Born-Oppenheimer (non-BO)] nonrelativistic variational calculations performed with all-particle explicitly correlated Gaussian functions and includes the leading relativistic and quantum electrodynamics energy corrections determined using the non-BO wave functions. The approach is applied to determine the total and transition energies for the lowest four ^{2}S electronic excitations of the boron atom. The transition energies agree with the available experimental values within 0.2-0.3 cm^{-1}. Previously, such accuracy was achieved for three- and four-electron systems.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.455
Threshold uncertainty score0.777

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.4550.280

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.242 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations15
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicAtomic and Molecular PhysicsFrench-language works237,207