Neutrino masses and mixings in a predictive <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" altimg="si1.gif" overflow="scroll"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">SO</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mn>10</mml:mn><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:math> model with CKM CP violation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has recently been shown that a minimal SO(10) model with a single 10 and a single 126 Higgs field breaking B–L symmetry predicts large solar and atmospheric mixings in agreement with observations if it is assumed that the neutrino mass obeys the type II seesaw formula. No additional symmetries need to be assumed for this purpose. Understanding CP violation in the renormalizable version of the model, however, requires a significant non-CKM source. In this Letter we show that if we extend the model by the inclusion of a heavy 120-dimensional Higgs field, then it can accommodate CKM CP violation while remaining predictive in the neutrino sector. Among the predictions are: (i) solar mixing angle in the observed range; (ii) θ13 in the range of 0.1 to 0.26; (iii) the Dirac phase close to maximal for the central value of the solar mixing angle.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".