MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4411093720 · doi:10.1103/jgxv-nf34

Exploring the onset of collectivity approaching <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>N</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>40</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> with masses of manganese isotopes

2025· article· lv· W4411093720 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. C · 2025
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of WindsorSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of British ColumbiaVictoria General HospitalUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of CalgaryMcGill University
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoLawrence Livermore National LaboratoryBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungUniversity of ManitobaFoundation for Canadian Studies in the United KingdomDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Isotopes in the region of the nuclear chart below $^{68}\mathrm{Ni}$ have been the subject of intense experimental and theoretical effort due to the potential onset of a new ``island of inversion'' when crossing the harmonic oscillator subshell closure at $N = 40$. We have measured the masses of $^{64-68}\textrm{Mn}$ using TITAN's multiple-reflection time-of-flight mass spectrometer, resulting in the first precision mass measurements of $^{67}\mathrm{Mn}$ and $^{68}\mathrm{Mn}$. These results are compared to \textit{ab initio} calculations and modern shell model calculations and show an increase in collectivity approaching $N=40$.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.226 · 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. C→Same topicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils→French-language works237,207→