Nonleptonic beauty baryon decays and <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:math> asymmetries based on an <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mn>3</mml:mn><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:math>-flavor analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider hadronic weak decays of beauty baryons into charmless baryons and pseudoscalar mesons in a general framework based on $SU(3)$ decomposition of the decay amplitudes. The advantage of this approach lies in the ability to perform an $SU(3)$ analysis of these decays without any particular set of dynamical assumptions while accounting for the effects of an arbitrarily broken $SU(3)$ flavor symmetry. Dictated by the symmetries of the effective Hamiltonian that allow us to relate or neglect reduced $SU(3)$ amplitudes, we derive several sum rule relations between amplitudes and relations between $CP$ asymmetries in these decays and identify those that hold even if $SU(3)$ is broken.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".