MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021542324 · doi:10.1103/physrevc.75.055205

Determination of the pion charge form factor for<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math>0.60–1.60 GeV<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math>

2007· article· lv· W2021542324 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review C · 2007
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum Chromodynamics and Particle Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlgorithmMathematicsPionPhysicsGeometryNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The data analysis for the reaction H1(e,e'π+)n, which was used to determine values for the charged pion form factor Fπ for values of Q2= 0.6-1.6 GeV2, has been repeated with careful inspection of all steps and special attention to systematic uncertainties. Also the method used to extract Fπ from the measured longitudinal cross section was critically reconsidered. Final values for the separated longitudinal and transverse cross sections and the extracted values of Fπ are presented. © 2007 The American Physical Society.

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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), Science and technology studies, 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 score0.891
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.007
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1720.005

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.250 · 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