Mass measurements of 99–101In challenge ab initio nuclear theory of the nuclide 100Sn
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The tin isotope 100 Sn is of singular interest for nuclear structure due to its closed-shell proton and neutron configurations. It is also the heaviest nucleus comprising protons and neutrons in equal numbers—a feature that enhances the contribution of the short-range proton–neutron pairing interaction and strongly influences its decay via the weak interaction. Decay studies in the region of 100 Sn have attempted to prove its doubly magic character 1 but few have studied it from an ab initio theoretical perspective 2,3 , and none of these has addressed the odd-proton neighbours, which are inherently more difficult to describe but crucial for a complete test of nuclear forces. Here we present direct mass measurements of the exotic odd-proton nuclide 100 In, the beta-decay daughter of 100 Sn, and of 99 In, with one proton less than 100 Sn. We use advanced mass spectrometry techniques to measure 99 In, which is produced at a rate of only a few ions per second, and to resolve the ground and isomeric states in 101 In. The experimental results are compared with ab initio many-body calculations. The 100-fold improvement in precision of the 100 In mass value highlights a discrepancy in the atomic-mass values of 100 Sn deduced from recent beta-decay results 4,5 .
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it