MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2938590840 · doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2019/11/007

Improved photomeson model for interactions of cosmic ray nuclei

2019· article· en· W2938590840 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsCosmic rayNucleonNeutrinoSuperposition principlePionDipoleNeutronUltra-high-energy cosmic ray

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Photohadronic interactions are important for the sources and the transport of Ultra-High Energy Cosmic Rays (UHECRs). Current state-of-the-art cosmic ray transport simulations handle nuclear disintegration at energies of the Giant Dipole Resonance at a more sophisticated level, as well as the photohadronic interactions of nucleons in the high-energy regime above the pion production threshold. However, the interactions of nuclei above the pion production threshold are commonly modeled by treating the nucleus as a superposition of free nucleons—ignoring the effect of the nuclear medium. We construct an improved, inclusive model for the photomeson regime for nuclei with A ⩽ 56 by employing more accurate, data-driven parametrizations of the interaction cross section, the fragmentation of the primary nucleus and the inclusive pion production cross section that directly affects the production of astrophysical neutrinos. We apply our results to two multi-messenger scenarios (Tidal Disruption Events and Gamma-Ray Bursts) in which photonuclear interactions in the photomeson regime are the dominant cooling process for the highest energy cosmic rays. While we find moderate changes to the mass composition of UHECRs, the astrophysical neutrino fluxes exhibit a significant (factor of a few) reduction compared to the naive superposition of free nucleons for sources of UHECR nuclei with a populated cascade. The numerical code implementing the model has been made publicly available, which facilitates the integration of our results in similar frameworks.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations28
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle PhysicsSame topicAstrophysics and Cosmic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207