MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3040785556 · doi:10.1038/s41467-020-17309-y

Addendum: The observation of vibrating pear-shapes in radon nuclei

2020· article· en· W3040785556 on OpenAlexaff
P. A. Butler, L. P. Gaffney, P. Spagnoletti, J. Konki, M. Scheck, J. F. Smith, K. Abrahams, M. Bowry, J. Cederkäll, T. E. Chupp, G. de Angelis, H. De Witte, P. E. Garrett, A. Goldkuhle, C. Henrich, A. Illana, K. Johnston, D. T. Joss, J. M. Keatings, N. A. Kelly, M. Komorowska, T. Kröll, M. P. Lozano, B. S. Nara Singh, D. O’Donnell, J. Ojala, R. D. Page, L. G. Pedersen, C. Raison, P. Reiter, José A. Rodríguez, D. Rosiak, S. Rothe, T. M. Shneidman, B. Siebeck, M. Seidlitz, J. Sinclair, M. Stryjczyk, P. Van Duppen, S. Víñals, V. Virtanen, N. Warr, K. Wrzosek-Lipska, M. Zielińska

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphTRIUMF
FundersScience and Technology Facilities Council
KeywordsAddendumPEARRadonBiologyPhysicsNuclear physicsHorticulturePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We would like to make readers aware that after the publication of this article the sort code was updated. This resulted in more gamma–gamma data, particularly for high-spin transitions. By performing additional analysis we confirm the energies of most of the states, have identified several new states, and have updated one of the states that was incorrectly represented in its energy in the original paper. The figures (Figs. 1 – 4 ) and table (Table 1 ) are updated along with their captions. The overall conclusions of the paper remain unaffected.

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)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.204
Threshold uncertainty score0.681

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0060.004
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2040.072

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature Communications→Same topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies→French-language works237,207→