Measurement of an excess of<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mo>¯</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>→</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo mathvariant="bold" stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mo>*</mml:mo><mml:mo mathvariant="bold" stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:msup><mml:mi>τ</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="bold">−</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi>ν</mml:mi><mml:mo>¯</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mi>τ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math>decays and implications for charged Higgs bosons
Why is this work in the frame?
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Full frame distilled prediction
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.
- Candidate categories
- Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
- Consensus categories
- Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
- Domain
- Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
- Study design
- Candidate signal: Theoretical or conceptualConsensus signal: none
- Genre
- Candidate signal: EmpiricalConsensus signal: Empirical
- Teacher disagreement score
- 0.758
- Threshold uncertainty score
- 0.999
- Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated·codex-gemma-dda1882f352a
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
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.
- Teacher spread
- 0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
- Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline· verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it
Abstract
Based on the full BABAR data sample, we report improved measurements of the ratios $\mathcal{R}(D)=\mathcal{B}(\overline{B}\ensuremath{\rightarrow}D{\ensuremath{\tau}}^{\ensuremath{-}}{\overline{\ensuremath{\nu}}}_{\ensuremath{\tau}})/\mathcal{B}(\overline{B}\ensuremath{\rightarrow}D{\ensuremath{\ell}}^{\ensuremath{-}}{\overline{\ensuremath{\nu}}}_{\ensuremath{\ell}})$ and $\mathcal{R}({D}^{*})=\mathcal{B}(\overline{B}\ensuremath{\rightarrow}{D}^{*}{\ensuremath{\tau}}^{\ensuremath{-}}{\overline{\ensuremath{\nu}}}_{\ensuremath{\tau}})/\mathcal{B}(\overline{B}\ensuremath{\rightarrow}{D}^{*}{\ensuremath{\ell}}^{\ensuremath{-}}{\overline{\ensuremath{\nu}}}_{\ensuremath{\ell}})$, where $\ensuremath{\ell}$ refers to either an electron or muon. These ratios are sensitive to new physics contributions in the form of a charged Higgs boson. We measure $\mathcal{R}(D)=0.440\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.058\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.042$ and $\mathcal{R}({D}^{*})=0.332\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.024\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.018$, which exceed the standard model expectations by $2.0\ensuremath{\sigma}$ and $2.7\ensuremath{\sigma}$, respectively. Taken together, the results disagree with these expectations at the $3.4\ensuremath{\sigma}$ level. This excess cannot be explained by a charged Higgs boson in the type II two-Higgs-doublet model. Kinematic distributions presented here exclude large portions of the more general type III two-Higgs-doublet model, but there are solutions within this model compatible with the results.
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.
The record
- Venue
- Physical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D, Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology
- Topic
- Particle physics theoretical and experimental studies
- Field
- Physics and Astronomy
- Canadian institutions
- University of VictoriaUniversité de MontréalMcGill UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
- Funders
- SLAC National Accelerator LaboratoryNorges ForskningsrådMinistry of Education and Science of the Russian FederationScience and Technology Facilities CouncilIstituto Nazionale di Fisica NucleareEuropean CommissionAlfred P. Sloan FoundationDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftU.S. Department of EnergyNational Science Foundation
- Keywords
- Higgs bosonParticle physicsPhysicsType (biology)Standard Model (mathematical formulation)Analytical Chemistry (journal)ChemistryMaterials science
- Has abstract in OpenAlex
- yes