MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386812921 · doi:10.3389/fphy.2023.1242668

Status of experimental knowledge on the unbound nucleus 13Be

2023· article· en· W4386812921 on OpenAlexafffund
K. L. Jones, J. Kovoor, R. Kanungo

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Physics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear physics research studies
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's UniversityTRIUMF
FundersOak Ridge National LaboratoryNuclear PhysicsOffice of ScienceScience and Technology Facilities CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistry of Science and ICT, South KoreaNational Research FoundationU.S. Department of EnergyNational Research Foundation of KoreaTRIUMFNational Science Foundation
KeywordsHaloPhysicsNeutronBerylliumNuclear physicsHalo nucleusContext (archaeology)InverseNucleusNucleonAtomic physicsMathematicsGeologyQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The structure of the unbound nucleus 13 Be is important for understanding the Borromean, two-neutron halo nucleus 14 Be. The experimental studies conducted over the last four decades are reviewed in the context of the beryllium chain of isotopes and some significant theoretical studies. The focus of this paper is the comparison of new data from a 12 Be(d,p) reaction in inverse kinematics, which was analyzed using Geant4 simulations and a Bayesian fitting procedure, with previous measurements. Two possible scenarios to explain the strength below 1 MeV above the neutron separation energy were proposed in that study: a single p-wave resonance or a mixture of an s-wave virtual state with a weaker p- or d-wave resonance. Comparisons of recent invariant mass and the (d,p) experiments show good agreement between the transfer measurement and the two most recent high-energy nucleon removal measurements.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.195
Threshold uncertainty score0.492

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PhysicsSame topicNuclear physics research studiesFrench-language works237,207