MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4391694583 · doi:10.1139/cjp-2023-0266

Adiabatic and post-adiabatic hyperspherical treatment of the huge ungerade proton-hydrogen scattering length

2024· article· en· W4391694583 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shayamal Singh, Chris H. Greene

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBasic Energy Sciences
KeywordsAdiabatic processPhysicsExcited stateScatteringQuantum mechanicsAdiabatic theoremBohr modelFano planeSymmetry (geometry)Theoretical physicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While the hydrogen molecular ion is the simplest molecule in nature and very well studied in all of its properties, it remains an interesting system to use for explorations of fundamental questions. One such question treated in this study relates to finding an optimal adiabatic representation of the physics, i.e., the best adiabatic description that minimizes the role of nonadiabatic effects. As a test case explored here in detail, we consider the ungerade symmetry of H[Formula: see text], which is known to have a huge scattering length of order 750 Bohr radii, and an incredibly weakly bound excited state. We show that a hyperspherical adiabatic description does an excellent job of capturing the main physics. Our calculation yields a competitive scattering length and shows that nonadiabatic corrections are small and can even be adequately captured using the post-adiabatic theory of Klar and Fano.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physics→Same topicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies→French-language works237,207→