MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W160141761 · doi:10.1103/physrevc.79.065201

Search for the charge-conjugation-forbidden decay<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>ω</mml:mi><mml:mo>→</mml:mo><mml:mi>η</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi>π</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn>0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math>

2009· article· lv· W160141761 on OpenAlexaff
A. Starostin, B. M. K. Nefkens, J. Ahrens, J. R. M. Annand, H. J. Arends, K. Bantawa, P. Aguar Bartolomé, R. Beck, V. Bekrenev, A. Braghieri, D. Branford, W. J. Briscoe, J. Brudvik, S. Cherepnya, E. J. Downie, L.V. Filʼkov, D. I. Glazier, R. Gregor, E. Heid, D. Hornidge, Oliver Jahn, T. C. Jude, V. L. Kashevarov, R. Kondratiev, M. Korolija, M. Kotulla, A. Koulbardis, S. P. Kruglov, B. Krusche, V. Lisin, K. Livingston, I. J. D. MacGregor, Y. Maghrbi, D. M. Manley, M. Martı́nez, J. C. McGeorge, E. F. McNicoll, D. Mekterović, V. Metag, S. Mičanović, M. Ostrick, P. Pedroni, F. Pheron, A. Polonski, S. Prakhov, J. E. M. Robinson, G. Rosner, M. Rost, S. Schumann, M. H. Sikora, D. I. Sober, I. Suarez, I. Supek, C. M. Tarbert, M. Thiel, A. Thomas, M. Unverzagt, D. P. Watts

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review C · 2009
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum Chromodynamics and Particle Interactions
Canadian institutionsMount Allison University
FundersScience and Technology Facilities Council
KeywordsPhysicsBranching fractionCharge (physics)Crystal BallAtomic physicsLimit (mathematics)MicrotronNuclear physicsElectronQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new upper limit of $2.3\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{\ensuremath{-}4}$ on the branching ratio of the decay $\ensuremath{\omega}\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\ensuremath{\eta}{\ensuremath{\pi}}^{0}$ has been obtained using the Crystal Ball multiphoton spectrometer at the Mainz Microtron MAMI. This decay is forbidden by charge-conjugation invariance of the strong and electromagnetic interactions. We have also obtained the upper limit of $2.3\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{\ensuremath{-}4}$ for the forbidden decay $\ensuremath{\omega}\ensuremath{\rightarrow}3{\ensuremath{\pi}}^{0}$ and the upper limit of $2.4\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{\ensuremath{-}4}$ for $\ensuremath{\omega}\ensuremath{\rightarrow}2{\ensuremath{\pi}}^{0}$.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.799
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.004
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2010.006

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.259 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review CSame topicQuantum Chromodynamics and Particle InteractionsFrench-language works237,207