MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4300443610

HALF-LIVES OF LONG-LIVED ALPHA DECAY, BETA DECAY, ELECTRON CAPTURE DECAY, BETA BETA-DECAY, PROTON DECAY AND SPONTANEOUS FISSION DECAY NUCLIDES.

2003· paratext· en· W4300443610 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
H E HOLDEN

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of North Texas Digital Library (University of North Texas) · 2003
Typeparatext
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear Physics and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBrookhaven National Laboratory
KeywordsBeta decayNuclideAlpha decayNuclear physicsRadioactive decayPhysicsDecay schemeSpontaneous fissionProton decayCluster decayDouble beta decayDecay energyBETA (programming language)Proton emissionElectron captureProtonBeta particleDecay chainElectronFissionGamma rayNeutronNeutrino
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In his review of radionuclides for dating purposes, Roth noted that there were a large number of nuclides, normally considered ''stable'' but which are radioactive with a very long half-life. Roth suggested that I review the data on the half-life values of these long-lived nuclides for the 2001 Atomic Weights Commission meeting in Brisbane. I provided a report, BNL-NCS-68377, to fulfill Roth's request. Peiser has now made a similar suggestion that I review these data for our next Commission meeting in Ottawa for their possible inclusion in our Tables. These half-life values for long-lived nuclides include those due to various decay modes, {alpha}-decay, {beta}-decay, electron capture decay, {beta}{beta}-decay, proton decay and spontaneous fission decay. This data review (post Brisbane) provides an update to the recommendation of the 2001 review.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.007

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of North Texas Digital Library (University of North Texas)Same topicNuclear Physics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207