MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Determination of the Proton's Weak Charge and Its Constraints on the Standard Model

2019· article· en· W2964558035 on OpenAlexaff
R. Carlini, W. T. H. van Oers, Mark Pitt, G. R. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsTRIUMF
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsParticle physicsPhysics beyond the Standard ModelAsymmetryParity (physics)Valence (chemistry)Semileptonic decayQuarkProtonCP violationCharge (physics)Standard Model (mathematical formulation)Nuclear physicsWeinberg angleWeak interactionParameter spaceLeptonQuantum mechanicsElectronStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article discusses some of the history of parity-violation experiments that culminated in the Qweak experiment, which provided the first determination of the proton's weak charge [Formula: see text]. The guiding principles necessary to the success of that experiment are outlined, followed by a brief description of the Qweak experiment. Several consistent methods used to determine [Formula: see text] from the asymmetry measured in the Qweak experiment are explained in detail. The weak mixing angle sin2θw determined from [Formula: see text] is compared with results from other experiments. A description of the procedure for using the [Formula: see text] result on the proton to set TeV-scale limits for new parity-violating semileptonic physics beyond the Standard Model (BSM) is presented. By also considering atomic parity-violation results on cesium, the article shows how this result can be generalized to set limits on BSM physics, which couples to any combination of valence quark flavors. Finally, the discovery space available to future weak-charge measurements is explored.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.274 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations12
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of Nuclear and Particle ScienceSame topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studiesFrench-language works237,207