MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3004069512 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1708.04219

Renormalization Mass Scale and Scheme Dependence in the Perturbative Contribution to Inclusive Semileptonic $b$ Decays

2017· preprint· en· W3004069512 on OpenAlexaff
Farrukh Chishtie, D. G. C. McKeon, T. N. Sherry

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2017
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRenormalizationPhysicsParticle physicsRenormalization groupQuarkPerturbation theory (quantum mechanics)ArbitrarinessSeries (stratigraphy)Non-perturbativeMathematical physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examine the perturbative calculation of the inclusive semi-leptonic decay rate $Γ$ for the $b$-quark, using mass-independent renormalization. To finite order of perturbation theory the series for $Γ$ will depend on the unphysical renormalization scale parameter $μ$ and on the particular choice of mass-independent renormalization scheme; these dependencies will only be removed after summing the series to all orders. In this paper we show that all explicit $μ$-dependence of $Γ$, through powers of ln$(μ)$, can be summed by using the renormalization group equation. We then find that this explicit $μ$-dependence can be combined together with the implicit $μ$-dependence of $Γ$ (through powers of both the running coupling $a(μ)$ and the running $b$-quark mass $m(μ)$) to yield a $μ$-independent perturbative expansion for $Γ$ in terms of $a(μ)$ and $m(μ)$ both evaluated at a renormalization scheme independent mass scale $I\!\!M$ which is fixed in terms of either the "$\overline{MS}$ mass" $\overline{m}_b$ of the $b$ quark or its pole mass $m_{pole}$. At finite order the resulting perturbative expansion retains a degree of arbitrariness associated with the particular choice of mass-independent renormalization scheme. We use the coefficients $c_i$ and $g_i$ of the perturbative expansions of the renormalization group functions $β(a)$ and $γ(a)$, associated with $a(μ)$ and $m(μ)$ respectively, to characterize the remaining renormalization scheme arbitrariness of $Γ$. We further show that all terms in the expansion of $Γ$ can be written in terms of the $c_i$ and $g_i$ coefficients and a set of renormalization scheme independent parameters $τ_i$.

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)0.005
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)→Same topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies→French-language works237,207→