Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Three-nucleon interactions are a frontier in understanding and predicting the structure of strongly-interacting matter in laboratory nuclei and in the cosmos. We present results and discuss the status of first calculations with microscopic three-nucleon interactions beyond light nuclei. This coherent effort is possible due to advances based on effective field theory and renormalization group methods in nuclear physics. The physics of strong interactions extends over extremes in density, neutron-to-proton imbalance and temperature (see Fig. 1). Understanding and predicting the properties of these fascinating forms of matter requires progress on fundamental problems in the theory of nuclear forces and in many-body physics. In this talk, we highlight the key role of three-nucleon (3N) interactions for nuclear structure. Nuclear interactions depend on a resolution scale, which we denote by a generic momentum cutoff Λ, and the Hamiltonian is always given by an effective theory for nucleon-nucleon (NN) and corresponding many-nucleon interactions (with corresponding effective operators) [1, 2, 3]: H(Λ) = T +VNN(Λ)+V3N(Λ)+V4N(Λ)+.... (1)
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".