MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Towards T2K neutrino flux predictions using the replica target measurements by NA61/SHINE

2017· article· en· W2756087034 on OpenAlexaff
L. Zambelli, A. Fiorentini, T. Vladisavljevic

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeutrinoPhysicsFlux (metallurgy)MuonLarge Hadron ColliderHadronNuclear physicsParticle physicsReplicaChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The precise knowledge of the neutrino flux composition and kinematics is one of the biggest challenges of long-baseline experiments such as T2K. Neutrinos are made by the in-flight decay of unstable hadrons produced by the interactions of 31GeV/c protons in a long graphite target. Mostly π (+) (π (−)) are created, leading to the ${\\nu }_{\\mu }({\\bar{\\nu }}_{\\mu })$ enhanced flux. As kaons and muons are also produced, an irreducible background of electron (anti-)neutrino is also present. The main source of uncertainty in the flux prediction is driven by the lack of data on the proton-carbon interaction in this energy range. The measurements performed by the NA61/SHINE large-acceptance experiment at CERN are used by the T2K collaboration to improve the flux predictions. Two datasets have been taken: using a thin target to study the primary interaction, and a replica of the T2K target to account for the re-interactions. The recently released differential multiplicity distributions of π (±) along the replica target measured in NA61/SHINE will be presented. This dataset is now in the process of being used by T2K to further tune the flux prediction as 90% of the neutrinos will be directly constrained.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.428
Threshold uncertainty score0.771

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studiesFrench-language works237,207