Rate Measurement of<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">D</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mo>→</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">K</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi>π</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>−</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi>π</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math>and Constraints on<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">D</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mi/><mml:mo>−</mml:mo><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mover><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">D</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>¯</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mover></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:math>Mixing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present an observation and time-integrated rate measurement of the decay ${D}^{0}\ensuremath{\rightarrow}{K}^{+}{\ensuremath{\pi}}^{\ensuremath{-}}{\ensuremath{\pi}}^{0}$ produced in $9{\mathrm{fb}}^{\ensuremath{-}1}$ of ${e}^{+}{e}^{\ensuremath{-}}$ collisions near the $\ensuremath{\Upsilon}(4S)$ resonance. The signal is inconsistent with an upward fluctuation of the background by 4.9 standard deviations. We measured the time-integrated rate of ${D}^{0}\ensuremath{\rightarrow}{K}^{+}{\ensuremath{\pi}}^{\ensuremath{-}}{\ensuremath{\pi}}^{0}$ normalized to the rate of $\overline{{D}^{0}}\ensuremath{\rightarrow}{K}^{+}{\ensuremath{\pi}}^{\ensuremath{-}}{\ensuremath{\pi}}^{0}$ to be ${0.0043}_{\ensuremath{-}0.0010}^{+0.0011}(\mathrm{stat})\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.0007(\mathrm{syst})$. This decay can be produced by doubly Cabibbo-suppressed decays or by the ${D}^{0}$ evolving into a $\overline{{D}^{0}}$ through mixing, followed by a Cabibbo-favored decay to ${K}^{+}{\ensuremath{\pi}}^{\ensuremath{-}}{\ensuremath{\pi}}^{0}$. We also found the $\mathrm{CP}$ asymmetry $A\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}=\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}({9}_{\ensuremath{-}22}^{+25})%$ be consistent with zero.
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 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 | 0.014 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.008 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.018 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.019 | 0.017 |
| Research integrity | 0.017 | 0.015 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.969 | 0.016 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".