MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1522128650 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.76.115003

Unparticle physics effects on direct<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:math>violation

2007· article· lv· W1522128650 on OpenAlexaff
Chuan-Hung Chen, Chao-Qiang Geng

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D, Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology · 2007
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsTRIUMF
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsParticle physicsUnparticle physicsPropagatorPhysics beyond the Standard ModelMathematical physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of the peculiar $CP$ conserving phases in unparticle propagators are explored. We find that the phases have a great impact on $CP$ violation. We adopt the decays ${B}_{d}\ensuremath{\rightarrow}{\ensuremath{\pi}}^{+}{\ensuremath{\pi}}^{\ensuremath{-}}$ and ${B}_{d}\ensuremath{\rightarrow}{\ensuremath{\ell}}^{\ensuremath{-}}{\ensuremath{\ell}}^{+}$ as the illustrators to demonstrate the influences of these phases on the direct $CP$ asymmetries. In particular, we emphasize that unparticle physics is the only model suggested to date that could give the direct $CP$ asymmetries in ${B}_{d}\ensuremath{\rightarrow}{\ensuremath{\ell}}^{\ensuremath{-}}{\ensuremath{\ell}}^{+}$ as large as 15%. We also point out that the unparticle phases could be probed in $B\ensuremath{\rightarrow}{K}^{*}{\ensuremath{\ell}}^{+}{\ensuremath{\ell}}^{\ensuremath{-}}$ decays by using T-odd correlations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.002

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 head0.300
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 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

Citations69
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D, Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmologySame topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studiesFrench-language works237,207