MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410957256 · doi:10.1103/physrevc.111.065801

Total absorption spectroscopy for the <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:msup> <mml:mi>β</mml:mi> <mml:mo>+</mml:mo> </mml:msup> </mml:math> decay strength distribution of <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mmultiscripts> <mml:mi>Ga</mml:mi> <mml:mprescripts/> <mml:none/> <mml:mn>60</mml:mn> </mml:mmultiscripts> </mml:math>

2025· article· lv· W4410957256 on OpenAlexafffund
G. Owens-Fryar, S. Lyons, A. Richard, A. Spyrou, B. A. Brown, Caroline Robin, Z. Meisel, H. C. Berg, A. Chester, A. A. Chen, B. P. Crider, P. A. DeYoung, P. Gastis, E. Good, Craig Harris, K. Hermansen, S. N. Liddick, A. Palmisano-Kyle, A. Psaltis, M. K. Smith, E. Rubino, S. K. Subedi, I. Sultana, A. Tsantiri

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. C · 2025
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear physics research studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersUniversität BielefeldNorges ForskningsrådLaboratory Directed Research and DevelopmentU.S. Department of EnergyNuclear Science and Security ConsortiumNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Nuclear Security AdministrationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsAlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

$\ensuremath{\beta}$-decay properties play an important role in most astrophysical processes. In the absence of experimental data, astrophysical models rely on global theoretical calculations to provide the relevant properties. It is therefore important to provide strong experimental constraints when possible. In the case of $\ensuremath{\beta}$-decay, the most sensitive probe is the $\ensuremath{\beta}$-decay strength distribution. We report here on the first measurement of the latter quantity for the ${\ensuremath{\beta}}^{+}$ decay of $^{60}\mathrm{Ga}$ using the total absorption spectroscopy technique. The experimental results are compared to theoretical calculations often used in astrophysical models, namely the shell model and the quasiparticle random phase approximation (QRPA), as well as an extension of QRPA that includes higher-order nucleonic calculations. Both models are in reasonable agreement with the experimental results.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.207

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0620.021

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. CSame topicNuclear physics research studiesFrench-language works237,207