MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7002131263

Mass measurements of isotopes of Nb, Mo, Tc, Ru, and Rh along the νp- and rp-process paths using the Canadian Penning trap mass spectrometer

2011· article· en· W7002131263 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCivil War Book Review · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear physics research studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPenning trapIsotopeAtomic massMass spectrometryMass numberTrap (plumbing)Quadrupole mass analyzerWork (physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The reaction paths of two proposed nucleosynthetic processes on the proton-rich side of stability, the rp and νp processes, pass through a region of isotopes between Mo and Pd where masses had long gone unmeasured. Precise knowledge of the paths and final abundances of these two processes has been limited by the corresponding lack of precision in the proton-separation energies Sp when derived from extrapolated masses. The masses of 18 neutron-deficient isotopes of Nb, Mo, Tc, Ru, and Rh have been measured using the Canadian Penning trap mass spectrometer. Three of the masses presented, 90Mo, 91Mo, and 93Tc, provide the first direct measurement of the masses of these nuclides, and the others provide confirmation of recent measurements using other Penning traps. Included in this work is a measurement of the mass of 87Mo, which differs by 3.7σ from the mass presented in the 2003 Atomic Mass Evaluation. This leads to a change in the Sp value of 88Tc which reduces the suppression of flow of the νp-process path through 87Mo(p,γ)88Tc reported following the mass measurement of 88Tc. This in turn affects the resulting νp-process abundances. © 2011 American Physical Society.

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)0.000
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 score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.177

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.222 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCivil War Book ReviewSame topicNuclear physics research studiesFrench-language works237,207