MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411307092 · doi:10.1016/j.jqsrt.2025.109545

On the use of the Axelrod formula for thermal electron collisions in astrophysical modelling

2025· article· en· W4411307092 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Leo Patrick Mulholland, Steven Bromley, C P Ballance, Stuart Sim, C A Ramsbottom

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Quantitative Spectroscopy and Radiative Transfer · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Molecular Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHORIZON EUROPE European Research CouncilEuropean Research CouncilNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationAuburn UniversityQueen's University BelfastEuropean CommissionQueen's University
KeywordsThermalElectronPhysicsStatistical physicsNuclear physicsComputational physicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Axelrod approximation is widely used in astrophysical modelling codes to evaluate electron-impact excitation effective collision strengths for forbidden transitions. Approximate methods such as this are a necessity for many heavy elements with open shells where collisional data is either non existent or sparse as the use of more robust methods prove prohibitively expensive. Atomic data for such forbidden transitions are essential for producing full collisional radiative models that do not assume Local-Thermodynamic-Equilibrium (LTE). In this short work we present the re-optimization the simple Axelrod formula for a large number of R -matrix data sets, ranging from Fe and Ni to the first r-process peak elements of Sr, Y and Zr, to higher Z systems Te, W, Pt and Au. We show that the approximate treatment of forbidden transitions can be a significant source of inaccuracy in such collisional radiative models. We find a large variance of the optimized coefficients for differing systems and charge states, although some general trends can be seen based on the orbital structure of the ground-state-configurations. These trends could potentially inform better estimates for future calculations for elements where R -matrix data is not available.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.721
Threshold uncertainty score0.283

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Quantitative Spectroscopy and Radiative TransferSame topicAtomic and Molecular PhysicsFrench-language works237,207