MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Determination of nuclear charge radius by extreme-ultraviolet spectroscopy of Na-like ions

2025· article· en· W4407086347 on OpenAlexafffund
Adam Hosier, Dipti Dipti, S. A. Blundell, A. Lapierre, R. Silwal, G. Gwinner, J. N. Tan, Aung Naing, J. D. Gillaspy, Yang Yang, Paul Szypryt, G. C. O’Neil, H. Staiger, Joan Dreiling, A. C. C. Villari, I. Angeli, Yuri Ralchenko, Endre Takács

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Molecular Physics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNuclear PhysicsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Institute of Standards and TechnologyU.S. Department of EnergyOffice of ScienceNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCharge radiusIonRADIUSEffective nuclear chargeAtomic physicsCharge (physics)SpectroscopyAtomic radiusIsotopePhysicsAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChemistryNuclear physicsProtonQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report on a method for determining the absolute nuclear charge radius of high- Z elements using extreme-ultraviolet spectroscopy of highly charged Na-like ions in tandem with highly accurate atomic structure calculations of transition energy differences. The application of this method has reduced the nuclear charge radius uncertainty of Ir 191 by a factor of 8 from the currently accepted literature value, with a recently reported charge radius of 5.435(12) fm. The result reduces the charge radius uncertainty along the full Ir isotopic chain when combined with prior optical isotope shift measurements. The technique utilizes only a few million ions stored in an ion trap, which should apply to measurements with small quantities of radioactive nuclei.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.365 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review ResearchSame topicAtomic and Molecular PhysicsFrench-language works237,207