MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Sudbury Neutrino Observatory

2009· article· en· W2134039515 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNeutrino Physics Research
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersScience and Technology Facilities Council
KeywordsPhysicsSolar neutrinoNeutrinoSolar neutrino problemNeutrino oscillationStandard solar modelObservatoryElectron neutrinoParticle physicsNeutrino detectorMeasurements of neutrino speedNuclear physicsFlux (metallurgy)Astrophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The solar neutrino problem arose when the first measurements of the flux of neutrinos from the Sun, taken by Raymond Davis, Jr. with a Cl-Ar radiochemical detector, fell substantially below the value predicted theoretically by John Bahcall. Bahcall's prediction came from a detailed model of the nuclear reactions powering the Sun. Resolution of the problem came three decades later with the observation of nonelectron flavors of neutrinos in the solar flux. The use of heavy water in the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory (SNO) experiment provided a means to measure both electron and nonelectron components, and the presence of the latter showed that neutrino flavor conversion was taking place—a hallmark of neutrino oscillation and mass. The solar models were vindicated, and the Standard Model of elementary particles and fields had to be revised. Here we present an account of the SNO project, its conclusions to date, and its ongoing analysis.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.599
Threshold uncertainty score0.235

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.302 · 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