MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964423657 · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.99.112002

Isospin Mixing in the Nucleon and<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mmultiscripts><mml:mi>He</mml:mi><mml:mprescripts/><mml:none/><mml:mn>4</mml:mn></mml:mmultiscripts></mml:math>and the Nucleon Strange Electric Form Factor

2007· article· lv· W1964423657 on OpenAlexaff
M. Viviani, R. Schiavilla, Bastian Kubis, Randy Lewis, L. Girlanda, A. Kievsky, L. E. Marcucci, S. Rosati

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2007
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear physics research studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIsospinPhysicsNucleonStrangenessAsymmetryParticle physicsChiral perturbation theoryNuclear physicsSymmetry breakingOrder (exchange)HadronQuark

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to isolate the contribution of the nucleon strange electric form factor to the parity-violating asymmetry measured in 4He(e-->],e')4He experiments, it is crucial to have a reliable estimate of the magnitude of isospin-symmetry-breaking (ISB) corrections in both the nucleon and 4He. We examine this issue in the present Letter. Isospin admixtures in the nucleon are determined in chiral perturbation theory, while those in 4He are derived from nuclear interactions, including explicit ISB terms. A careful analysis of the model dependence in the resulting predictions for the nucleon and nuclear ISB contributions to the asymmetry is carried out. We conclude that, at the low momentum transfers of interest in recent measurements reported by the HAPPEX Collaboration at Jefferson Lab, these contributions are of comparable magnitude to those associated with strangeness components in the nucleon electric form factor.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations25
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicNuclear physics research studiesFrench-language works237,207