Bibliographic record
Abstract
The neutrino is a good probe of extra dimensions. Large mixing and the apparent lack of very complicated oscillation patterns may be an indication of large couplings between the brane and a single bulk neutrino. A simple and realistic five-dimensional model of this kind is discussed. It requires a sterile neutrino in addition to three active neutrinos on the brane, all coupled strongly to one common bulk neutrino, but not directly among themselves. Mindful that sterile neutrinos are disfavored in the atmospheric and solar data, we demand induced mixing to occur among the active neutrinos, but not between the active and the sterile. The size R of the extra dimension is arbitrary in this model, otherwise it contains six parameters which can be used to fit the three neutrino masses and the three mixing angles. However, in the model these six parameters must be suitably ordered, so a successful fit is not guaranteed. It turns out that not only can the data be fitted, but, as a result of the ordering, a natural connection between the smallness of the reactor angle ${\ensuremath{\theta}}_{13}$ and the smallness of the mass-gap ratio $\ensuremath{\Delta}{M}_{\mathrm{solar}}^{2}/\ensuremath{\Delta}{M}_{\mathrm{atmospheric}}^{2}$ can be derived.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".