MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Unveiling nuclear isomers through multiple-reflection time-of-flight mass spectrometry

2024· article· en· W4394808505 on OpenAlexaff
T. Dickel, Ali Mollaebrahimi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe European Physical Journal Special Topics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear physics research studies
Canadian institutionsTRIUMF
FundersGSI Helmholtzzentrum für SchwerionenforschungDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsMass spectrometryTime of flightCharacterization (materials science)Resolution (logic)Time-of-flight mass spectrometryNuclear physicsChemistryComputer sciencePhysicsMaterials scienceNanotechnologyChromatographyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Nuclear isomers, the excited meta-stable states of nuclei, offer profound insights into nuclear structure. This article reviews the intersection of nuclear isomer research with mass spectrometry methodologies, particularly focusing on novel capabilities of the multiple-reflection time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MR-TOF-MS) technique. Through a comprehensive examination of established methods for isomer identification and characterization, alongside the technical principles underlying MR-TOF-MS, this review discusses the pivotal role of mass spectrometry in advancing our understanding of nuclear isomers. The operational principles and recent developments in MR-TOF-MS technology are explained and exemplified through case studies from prominent research facilities. Furthermore, this work discusses ongoing efforts to enhance sensitivity, resolution, and measurement capabilities in MR-TOF-MS, promising continued advancements in nuclear physics research and applications.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe European Physical Journal Special TopicsSame topicNuclear physics research studiesFrench-language works237,207