MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3014978797 · doi:10.1007/jhep05(2020)123

E6 motivated UMSSM confronts experimental data

2020· article· en· W3014978797 on OpenAlexafffund
Mariana Frank, Yaşar Hiçyılmaz, Stefano Moretti, Özer Özdal

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersScience and Technology Facilities CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacsTürkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma KurumuUniversity of Southampton
KeywordsPhysicsParticle physicsMixing (physics)Large Hadron ColliderSymmetry breakingGauge symmetryPhysics beyond the Standard ModelParameter spaceGauge bosonStandard Model (mathematical formulation)Gauge (firearms)U-1Kinetic energyTheoretical physicsMinimal Supersymmetric Standard ModelSymmetry (geometry)Space (punctuation)Gauge theoryComputer scienceQuantum mechanicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We test E 6 realisations of a generic U(1)′ extended Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (UMSSM), parametrised in terms of the mixing angle pertaining to the new U(1)′ sector, $$ {\theta}_{E_6} $$ θ E 6 , against all currently available data, from space to ground experiments, from low to high energies. We find that experimental constraints are very restrictive and indicate that large gauge kinetic mixing and $$ {\theta}_{E_6} $$ θ E 6 ≈ −π/3 are required within this theoretical construct to achieve compliance with current data. The consequences are twofold. On the one hand, large gauge kinetic mixing implies that the Z′ boson emerging from the breaking of the additional U(1)′ symmetry is rather wide since it decays mainly into WW pairs. On the other hand, the preferred $$ {\theta}_{E_6} $$ θ E 6 value calls for a rather specific E 6 breaking pattern different from those commonly studied. We finally delineate potential signatures of the emerging UMSSM scenario in both Large Hadron Collider (LHC) and in Dark Matter (DM) experiments.

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)0.004
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.271
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 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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy Physics→Same topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies→French-language works237,207→