MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167716774 · doi:10.1142/s0217751x0201279x

SOLAR NEUTRINO RESULTS FROM THE SUDBURY NEUTRINO OBSERVATORY

2002· article· en· W2167716774 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
J. Klein

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Modern Physics A · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNeutrino Physics Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsSolar neutrinoNeutrinoFlux (metallurgy)Solar neutrino problemParticle physicsNuclear physicsSuper-KamiokandeElectronStandard solar modelNeutrino oscillation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe here the measurement of the flux of neutrinos created by the decay of solar 8B by the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory (SNO). The neutrinos were detected via the charged current (CC) reaction on deuterium and by the elastic scattering (ES) of electrons. The CC reaction is sensitive exclusively to νe's, while the ES reaction also has a small sensitivity to νμ's and ντ's. The flux of νe's from 8B decay measured by the CC reaction rate is [Formula: see text]. Assuming no flavor transformation, the flux inferred from the ES reaction rate is [Formula: see text]. Comparison of ϕ CC (νe) to the Super-Kamiokande Collaboration's precision value of ϕ ES (νx) yields a 3.3σ difference, assuming the systematic uncertainties are normally distributed, providing evidence that there is non-electron flavor active neutrino component in the solar flux. The total flux of active 8B neutrinos is thus determined to be 5.44 ± 0.99 × 106 cm- 2s- 1, in close agreement with the predictions of solar models.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Modern Physics ASame topicNeutrino Physics ResearchFrench-language works237,207