MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046392794 · doi:10.1139/cjp-2020-0104

A bridge between finite and infinite nuclear matter

2020· article· en· W3046392794 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
S. K. Biswal, Shailesh Kumar Singh, M. Bhuyan, R. N. Panda, S. K. Patra

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear physics research studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsNuclear matterObservableExcitationMean field theoryFermi Gamma-ray Space TelescopeStatistical physicsQuantum mechanicsNuclear physicsNucleon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The bridge between finite and infinite nuclear systems is analyzed for the fundamental quantities, such as binding energy, incompressibility, and giant monopole excitation energy, using relativistic mean-field formalism. The well-known Thomas–Fermi, extended Thomas–Fermi, and Hartree approximations are used to evaluate the observables. A parametric form of the density is used to convert the infinite nuclear matter density to the mean density of a finite nucleus. The present analysis shows an approximate estimation of finite nucleus properties from information on the corresponding infinite nuclear matter quantities. In other words, it is not quite exact to get the observables of finite nuclei by converting the corresponding entities of the nuclear matter system or vice versa. If this can be achieved at all, it can be done only approximately.

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)0.005
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.006
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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