MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7014615458

Precision Penning-trap measurement to investigate the role of the <sup>51</sup>Cr(e<sup>−</sup>,ν<sub>e</sub>)<sup>51</sup>V Q value in the gallium anomaly

2014· article· en· W7014615458 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueMax Planck Digital Library · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear physics research studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGalliumIsotopeContext (archaeology)CalibrationAtomic massElectron captureElectronStandard deviationAnomaly (physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A direct Q-value measurement has been made at TRIUMF's Ion Trap for Atomic and Nuclear Science (TITAN) for the Cr51(e−,νe)V51 reaction. This electron capture (EC) reaction was used in calibration measurements at the solar neutrino experiments SAGE and GALLEX, and the observed event rate differed from predictions creating the so-called gallium anomaly. Using isotopes delivered by the Isotope Separator and Accelerator (ISAC) facility at TRIUMF and charge breeding them to charge states 5+ and 6+, a Q value of 751.86(55) keV was determined. This represents a 1.3σ deviation from the result in the Atomic Mass Evaluation 2012 (AME12) and the value used in the calculated event rate. This deviation is found to be insignificant in context of the gallium anomaly, thus confirming that the predicted event rate has not been overestimated as the result of an erroneous Cr51 EC Q value. Additionally, the absolute masses of each Cr51 and V51 have been independently determined and are in agreement with the AME12 values.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.197 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMax Planck Digital LibrarySame topicNuclear physics research studiesFrench-language works237,207