MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3034678343 · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2020.07.006

The anomalous magnetic moment of the muon in the Standard Model

2020· article· en· W3034678343 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics Reports · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Physics and Python Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCoordinación de la Investigación CientíficaFundação para a Ciência e a TecnologiaJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaScience and Technology Facilities CouncilHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeOffice of ScienceEuropean Research CouncilNational Institute of Standards and TechnologyDanmarks Frie ForskningsfondNuclear PhysicsJunta de AndalucíaHelmholtz AssociationAgence Nationale de la RechercheMinistry of Education and Research, RomaniaCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueU.S. Department of EnergyVetenskapsrådetMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadNational Research FoundationHigh Energy Accelerator Research OrganizationEuropean CommissionMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónIstituto Nazionale di Fisica NucleareGeneralitat de CatalunyaBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungIsaac Newton TrustStrongSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y TecnologíaMinistry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian FederationUniversidad Michoacana de San Nicolás de HidalgoHigh Energy PhysicsDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftFermilabNational Science FoundationUniversity of WashingtonRussian Science FoundationLeverhulme TrustUniversity of ConnecticutAix-Marseille Université
KeywordsAnomalous magnetic dipole momentHadronElectroweak interactionMuonDispersion relationStandard Model (mathematical formulation)ScatteringMoment (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We review the present status of the Standard Model calculation of the anomalous magnetic moment of the muon. This is performed in a perturbative expansion in the fine-structure constant α and is broken down into pure QED, electroweak, and hadronic contributions. The pure QED contribution is by far the largest and has been evaluated up to and including O(α5) with negligible numerical uncertainty. The electroweak contribution is suppressed by (mμ∕MW)2 and only shows up at the level of the seventh significant digit. It has been evaluated up to two loops and is known to better than one percent. Hadronic contributions are the most difficult to calculate and are responsible for almost all of the theoretical uncertainty. The leading hadronic contribution appears at O(α2) and is due to hadronic vacuum polarization, whereas at O(α3) the hadronic light-by-light scattering contribution appears. Given the low characteristic scale of this observable, these contributions have to be calculated with nonperturbative methods, in particular, dispersion relations and the lattice approach to QCD. The largest part of this review is dedicated to a detailed account of recent efforts to improve the calculation of these two contributions with either a data-driven, dispersive approach, or a first-principle, lattice-QCD approach. The final result reads aμSM=116591810(43)×10−11 and is smaller than the Brookhaven measurement by 3.7σ. The experimental uncertainty will soon be reduced by up to a factor four by the new experiment currently running at Fermilab, and also by the future J-PARC experiment. This and the prospects to further reduce the theoretical uncertainty in the near future – which are also discussed here – make this quantity one of the most promising places to look for evidence of new physics.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations1,187
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics ReportsSame topicComputational Physics and Python ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207