MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2462027385 · doi:10.1142/s021773231630024x

αs analyses from hadronic tau decays with OPAL and ALEPH data

2016· article· en· W2462027385 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Physics Letters A · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlephHadronCoupling (piping)Dimension (graph theory)Limit (mathematics)Duality (order theory)Product (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, we extracted the strong coupling, [Formula: see text], from the revised ALEPH data for non-strange hadronic tau decays. Our analysis is based on a method previously used for the determination of the strong coupling from OPAL data. In our strategy, we employ different moments of the spectral functions both with and without pinching, including duality violations, in order to obtain fully self-consistent analyses that do not rely on untested assumptions (such as the smallness of higher dimension contributions in the operation product expansion (OPE)). Here we discuss the [Formula: see text] values obtained from the ALEPH and the OPAL data, the robustness of the analysis, as well as non-perturbative contributions from DVs and the OPE. We show that, although the [Formula: see text] determination is sound, non-perturbative effects limit the accuracy with which one can extract the strong coupling from tau decay data. Finally, we discuss the compatibility of the data sets and the possibility of a combined 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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.238
Threshold uncertainty score0.530

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.249 · 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