MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

New evidence for alpha clustering structure in the ground state band of 212Po

2021· article· en· W3198659118 on OpenAlexaff
M. von Tresckow, M. Rüdigier, T. M. Shneidman, Th. Kröll, M. Boromiza, C. Clisu, C. Costache, D. Filipescu, N. M. Florea, I. Gheorghe, K. Gladnishki, A. Ionescu, D. Kocheva, R. Lică, N. Mărginean, R. Mărginean, K.R. Mashtakov, C. Mihai, R. E. Mihai, A. Negreţ, C. R. Niţă, A. Olăcel, A. Oprea, Sofia I. Pascu, G. Rainovski, T. Sava, M. Scheck, P. Spagnoletti, C. Sotty, L. Stan, Irina Stiru, S. Toma, A. Turturică, S. Ujeniuc

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics Letters B · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear physics research studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersScience and Technology Facilities Council
KeywordsPhysicsYrastCluster analysisAtomic physicsGround stateCoincidenceState (computer science)Cluster (spacecraft)Nuclear physicsExcited stateStatisticsAlgorithmMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Half-lives of the low-lying yrast states of 212Po have been measured using the delayed coincidence fast-timing method. We report on the first measurement of the 41+ half-life, as well as a new measurement of the 61+ half-life with improved accuracy compared to previous studies. The extracted lifetime of the 41+ and 61+ state have been determined to be 100(14) ps and 1.66(28) ns respectively. With these measurements, precise values are now available for the reduced transition strengths B(E2) of all ground state band levels in 212Po up to the first 8+ state, in particular B(E2; 41+→21+) = 9.4(13) W.u. and B(E2;61+→41+) = 8.7(15) W.u. Comparison of the new available data with an α-clustering model calculation provides evidence that the inclusion of the α-cluster degree of freedom significantly improves agreement with experimental data compared to earlier shell model calculations.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.399
Threshold uncertainty score0.439

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics Letters BSame topicNuclear physics research studiesFrench-language works237,207