MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2789230912 · doi:10.1139/cjp-2017-0749

Surface interaction effects to a Klein–Gordon particle embedded in a Woods–Saxon potential well in terms of thermodynamic functions<sup>,</sup>

2018· article· en· W2789230912 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
B. C. Lütfüoğlu

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum Mechanics and Non-Hermitian Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsWoods–Saxon potentialSurface (topology)Particle (ecology)Mathematical physicsKlein–Gordon equationTheoretical physicsQuantum mechanicsNuclear reactionNonlinear systemGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, it has been investigated how the thermodynamic functions vary when the surface interactions are taken into account for a nucleon that is confined in a Woods–Saxon potential well, with a non-relativistic point of view. In this manuscript, the same problem is handled with a relativistic point of view. More precisely, the Klein–Gordon equation is solved in the presence of mixed scalar–vector generalized symmetric Woods–Saxon potential energy that is coupled to momentum and mass. Employing the continuity conditions the bound state energy spectra of an arbitrarily parameterized well are derived. It is observed that, when a term representing the surface effect is taken into account, the character of Helmholtz free energy and entropy versus temperature are modified in a similar fashion as this inclusion is done in the non-relativistic regime. Whereas it is found that this inclusion leads to different characters to internal energy and specific heat functions for relativistic and non-relativistic regimes.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 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

Citations10
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicQuantum Mechanics and Non-Hermitian PhysicsFrench-language works237,207