MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2887227446 · doi:10.1139/cjp-2018-0201

Volume and surface nonlocality terms in the neutron–nucleus elastic scattering using the velocity-dependent optical potential

2018· article· en· W2887227446 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Muhsin Hasan

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear physics research studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsQuantum nonlocalityElastic scatteringScatteringNeutronComputational physicsOpticsAtomic physicsNuclear physicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, we tested the effect of adding a volume term to the surface term in our modified optical potential in the case of elastic neutron scattering of spin-zero 40Ca nucleus in the incident energy range between 30–50 MeV. This is achieved in two steps. First, we fit our theoretical elastic angular distribution scattering using the surface term in our velocity-dependent optical potential concerning the experimental data. Then, we adjust our theoretical elastic angular distribution scattering with the experimental data after adding the volume term into our velocity-dependent optical potential. The second step is comparing the two fits and noticing the effect of adding a volume term to the surface term. Clearly, the modified optical potential using the volume term resulted in excellent fits to the experimental data, most notably the pronounced large angle, backscattering minima, which depend sensitively on the incident energies and which have long been associated with nonlocalities. We assume the nonlocality to be due to interaction between the incident neutrons and the nucleons inside the target.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicNuclear physics research studiesFrench-language works237,207