Measurement of the<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mi>I</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mo stretchy="false">/</mml:mo><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:math><mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mo>π</mml:mo><mml:mtext> </mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="script">S</mml:mi></mml:math>-wave amplitude from Dalitz plot analyses of<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi>η</mml:mi><mml:mi>c</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy="false">→</mml:mo><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">¯</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mi>π</mml:mi></mml:math>in two-photon interactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study the processes $\ensuremath{\gamma}\ensuremath{\gamma}\ensuremath{\rightarrow}{K}_{S}^{0}{K}^{\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}}{\ensuremath{\pi}}^{\ensuremath{\mp}}$ and $\ensuremath{\gamma}\ensuremath{\gamma}\ensuremath{\rightarrow}{K}^{+}{K}^{\ensuremath{-}}{\ensuremath{\pi}}^{0}$ using a data sample of $519\text{ }\text{ }{\mathrm{fb}}^{\ensuremath{-}1}$ recorded with the BABAR detector operating at the SLAC PEP-II asymmetric-energy ${e}^{+}{e}^{\ensuremath{-}}$ collider at center-of-mass energies at and near the $\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Upsilon}}(nS)$ ($n=2$, 3, 4) resonances. We observe ${\ensuremath{\eta}}_{c}$ decays to both final states and perform Dalitz plot analyses using a model-independent partial wave analysis technique. This allows a model-independent measurement of the mass-dependence of the $I=1/2$ $K\ensuremath{\pi}\text{ }\mathcal{S}$-wave amplitude and phase. A comparison between the present measurement and those from previous experiments indicates similar behavior for the phase up to a mass of $1.5\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{GeV}/{c}^{2}$. In contrast, the amplitudes show very marked differences. The data require the presence of a new ${a}_{0}(1950)$ resonance with parameters $m=1931\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}14\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}22\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{MeV}/{c}^{2}$ and $\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Gamma}}=271\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}22\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}29\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{MeV}$.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.045 | 0.031 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".