MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2730785072 · doi:10.1103/physrevc.96.014306

Confirmation of the isomeric state in <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mmultiscripts><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">P</mml:mi><mml:mprescripts/><mml:none/><mml:mn>26</mml:mn></mml:mmultiscripts></mml:math>

2017· article· lv· W2730785072 on OpenAlexafffund
D. Pérez–Loureiro, C. Wrede, M. B. Bennett, S. N. Liddick, A. Bowe, B. A. Brown, A. A. Chen, K. A. Chipps, Natalie Cooper, E. McNeice, F. Naqvi, R. Ortez, S. D. Pain, J. Pereira, C. J. Prokop, S. J. Quinn, J. Sakstrup, Marco D. Santia, Sanford Schwartz, Safwan Shanab, A. Simon, A. Spyrou, E. Thiagalingam

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. C · 2017
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear physics research studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaU.S. Department of EnergyNational Nuclear Security AdministrationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsProtonEnergy (signal processing)State (computer science)Atomic physicsNuclear physicsMathematicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report the independent experimental confirmation of an isomeric state in the proton drip-line nucleus $^{26}\mathrm{P}$. The $\ensuremath{\gamma}$-ray energy and half-life determined are $164.4\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.3\phantom{\rule{0.16em}{0ex}}(\text{sys})\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.2\phantom{\rule{0.16em}{0ex}}(\text{stat})$ keV and $104\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}14$ ns, respectively, which are in agreement with the previously reported values. These values are used to set a semiempirical limit on the proton separation energy of $^{26}\mathrm{P}$, with the conclusion that it can be bound or unbound.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.925
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.265 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. CSame topicNuclear physics research studiesFrench-language works237,207