IMPROVEMENT OF RENORMALIZATION-SCALE UNCERTAINTIES WITHIN EMPIRICAL DETERMINATIONS OF THE b-QUARK MASS
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate determinations of the [Formula: see text]b-quark mass m b (m b ) from σ(e + e - → hadrons ) experimental data currently contain three comparable sources of uncertainty; the experimental uncertainty from moments of this cross-section, the uncertainty associated with α s (M z ), and the theoretical uncertainty associated with the renormalization scale. Through resummation of all logarithmic terms explicitly determined in the perturbative series by the renormalization-group (RG) equation, it is shown that the renormalization-scale dependence is virtually eliminated as a source of theoretical uncertainty in m b (m b ). This resummation also reduces the estimated effect of higher-loop perturbative contributions, further reducing the theoretical uncertainties in m b (m b ). Furthermore, such resummation techniques improve the agreement between the values of the [Formula: see text]b-quark mass extracted from the various moments of R(s) = σ(e + e - → hadrons )/σ pt [σ pt = 4πα 2 /(3s)], obviating the need to choose an optimum moment for determining m b (m b ). Based on this analysis, the resulting value of the b-mass is m b (m b ) = 4.207 GeV ± 40 MeV , where the dominant uncertainty now arises from the experimental moments. Resummation techniques are also shown to reduce renormalization-scale dependence in the relation between b-quark [Formula: see text] and pole mass and in the relation between the pole and 1S mass.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it