MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2746732965 · doi:10.1007/jhep11(2017)142

A complete basis of helicity operators for subleading factorization

2017· article· en· W2746732965 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum Chromodynamics and Particle Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryNuclear PhysicsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaLaboratory Directed Research and DevelopmentU.S. Department of EnergyHigh Energy PhysicsHarvard UniversitySimons Foundation
KeywordsFactorizationHelicityFormalism (music)Operator (biology)AmplitudeEffective field theoryScatteringOperator product expansionBasis (linear algebra)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Factorization theorems underly our ability to make predictions for many processes involving the strong interaction. Although typically formulated at leading power, the study of factorization at subleading power is of interest both for improving the precision of calculations, as well as for understanding the all orders structure of QCD. We use the SCET helicity operator formalism to construct a complete power suppressed basis of hard scattering operators for e + e − → dijets, e − p → e − jet, and constrained Drell-Yan, including the first two subleading orders in the amplitude level power expansion. We analyze the field content of the jet and soft function contributions to the power suppressed cross section for e + e − → dijet event shapes, and give results for the lowest order matching to the contributing operators. These results will be useful for studies of power corrections both in fixed order and resummed perturbation theory.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations80
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy PhysicsSame topicQuantum Chromodynamics and Particle InteractionsFrench-language works237,207