MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

New Limit on the Permanent Electric Dipole Moment of <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mmultiscripts><mml:mrow><mml:mi>Xe</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mprescripts/><mml:none/><mml:mrow><mml:mn>129</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mmultiscripts></mml:mrow></mml:math> Using <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mmultiscripts><mml:mrow><mml:mi>He</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mprescripts/><mml:none/><mml:mrow><mml:mn>3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mmultiscripts></mml:mrow></mml:math> Comagnetometry and SQUID Detection

2019· article· lv· W2978353349 on OpenAlexaff
Natasha Sachdeva, I. Fan, Earl Babcock, M. Burghoff, T. E. Chupp, Skyler Degenkolb, P. Fierlinger, S. Haude, E. Kraegeloh, Wolfgang Kilian, S. Knappe-Grüneberg, F. Kuchler, Tianhao Liu, M. G. Marino, Jonas Meinel, Katharina Rolfs, Zahir Salhi, A. Schnabel, Jaideep Singh, S. Stuiber, W. A. Terrano, Lutz Trahms, Jens Voigt

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2019
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Subatomic Physics Research
Canadian institutionsTRIUMF
FundersDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftMichigan State UniversityU.S. Department of EnergyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsDipoleMagnetometerElectric dipole momentPhysicsMoment (physics)Magnetic momentMagnetic dipoleAtomic physicsLimit (mathematics)Nuclear magnetic resonanceCondensed matter physicsMagnetic fieldQuantum mechanicsMathematical analysisMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report results of a new technique to measure the electric dipole moment of $^{129}\mathrm{Xe}$ with $^{3}\mathrm{He}$ comagnetometry. Both species are polarized using spin-exchange optical pumping, transferred to a measurement cell, and transported into a magnetically shielded room, where SQUID magnetometers detect free precession in applied electric and magnetic fields. The result from a one week measurement campaign in 2017 and a 2.5 week campaign in 2018, combined with detailed study of systematic effects, is ${d}_{A}(^{129}\mathrm{Xe})=(1.4\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}6.{6}_{\mathrm{stat}}\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}2.{0}_{\mathrm{syst}})\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{\ensuremath{-}28}\text{ }\text{ }e\text{ }\mathrm{cm}$. This corresponds to an upper limit of $|{d}_{A}(^{129}\mathrm{Xe})|<1.4\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{\ensuremath{-}27}\text{ }\text{ }e\text{ }\mathrm{cm}$ (95% C.L.), a factor of 5 more sensitive than the limit set in 2001.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.223

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0670.024

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 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

Citations88
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicAtomic and Subatomic Physics ResearchFrench-language works237,207