Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The mass ledger runs on five coefficients. The honest description used across this corpus has been "four fitted, one derived." This paper sharpens that sentence by auditing all five in one place — including one new result: the surface coefficient can be estimated to 7% by bond-counting on the packing, with zero new parameters. The audited provenance line, which replaces "four fitted" wherever the ledger's provenance is discussed: One derived exactly. One estimated to ~7% by geometry already in the deposit. One half-explained by the Fermi gas at the deposit's own density. Two open — with their failed derivation attempts on the record. [estimate for a_S, prior art credited; the audit itself is the deposit item; nothing here is upgraded to "derived"] This record holds one paper on its own and is refreshed every couple of months. The complete deposit, 10.5281/zenodo.21788037, holds every paper with its code and data and is updated first; for the newest version of this paper, go there.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
James Norman Ibbotson (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: