MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2582355957 · doi:10.1103/physreva.95.013840

Neutron interferometer crystallographic imperfections and gravitationally induced quantum interference measurements

2017· article· en· W2582355957 on OpenAlexafffund
B. Heacock, M. Arif, R. Haun, M. G. Huber, D. A. Pushin, A. R. Young

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. A/Physical review, A · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear Physics and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Institute of Standards and TechnologyCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of CanadaU.S. Department of EnergyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsAstronomical interferometerInterference (communication)InterferometryBragg's lawOpticsNeutronNeutron diffractionPhase (matter)DiffractionStructure factorComputational physicsCondensed matter physicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dynamical diffraction leads to an interesting, unavoidable set of interference effects for neutron interferometers. This experiment studies the interference signal from two and three successive Bragg diffractions in the Laue geometry. We find that intrinsic Bragg-plane misalignment in monolithic, "perfect" silicon neutron interferometers is relevant between successive diffracting crystals, as well as within the Borrmann fan for typical interferometer geometries. We show that the dynamical phase correction employed in the Colella, Overhauser, and Werner gravitationally induced quantum interference experiments is attenuated by slight, intrinsic misalignments between diffracting crystals, potentially explaining the long-standing 1% discrepancy between theory and experiment. This systematic may also impact precision measurements of the silicon structure factor, affecting previous and future measurements of the Debye-Waller factor and neutron-electron scattering length as well as potential fifth-force searches. For the interferometers used in this experiment, Bragg planes of different diffracting crystals were found to be misaligned by 10 to 40 nrad.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.341 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations14
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. A/Physical review, ASame topicNuclear Physics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207