Lyman line ratios in charge-exchange collisions of <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">C</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>6</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math> and <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>8</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math> ions with hydrogen and krypton atoms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Charge-exchange collisions of ${\mathrm{C}}^{6+}$ and ${\mathrm{O}}^{8+}$ ions with hydrogen and krypton atoms followed by radiative emissions are examined using the two-center basis generator method in the low- and intermediate-energy regimes. Capture cross sections are obtained within the independent-electron model and are used in a radiative cascade model to yield Lyman line-emission counts. The main focus of this analysis is on single-electron capture with the inclusion of autoionizing double capture in krypton collisions. Because hydrogen and krypton have the same first ionization potential, it is expected from the classical overbarrier model that the capture selectivity of these two atoms is the same, making krypton a good surrogate for hydrogen to study collision-induced radiative emissions in the laboratory. However, the present analysis shows that the subshell distributions with respect to the impact energy in krypton collisions can differ from hydrogen collisions and, hence, from predictions of the classical overbarrier model. Based on the comparison of present results with previous measurements, this difference in capture behavior of the two target atoms does not appear problematic for the Lyman line-emission results for ${\mathrm{C}}^{6+}$ collisions, but does appear to affect these results for ${\mathrm{O}}^{8+}$ collisions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.041 | 0.005 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".