One- and two-center effects in single ionization in high-energy collisions of protons and hydrogen molecules
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Doubly differential and total cross sections for single ionization in ${\mathrm{H}}^{+}\ensuremath{-}{\mathrm{H}}_{2}$ collisions are evaluated in the continuum distorted wave with eikonal initial state model. One- and two-center models are used to represent the target molecule. In the two-center model, the initial orbitals are represented by Hartree-Fock (HF) or density functional methods, while the continuum wave function of the ejected electron is determined on the spherically averaged model potential derived from the ground-state configuration. In the one-center description of the ${\mathrm{H}}_{2}$ molecule, both the initial and final orbitals are represented on the same potential. Cross sections evaluated with the HF description of the target are generally in good agreement with both experimental data and available theoretical calculations. Models describing the motion of the ejected electron in a potential field derived from a two-center description of the molecule underestimate the electron yield at backward emission angles. The inadequacy of these applications is related to the scattering of the electron by the target nucleus, which is more realistically considered in a calculation based on a one-center description of the molecule.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".