MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3094590340 · doi:10.1007/jhep02(2021)015

Anomalous dimensions from gauge couplings in SMEFT with right-handed neutrinos

2021· article· en· W3094590340 on OpenAlexafffund
Alakabha Datta, Jacky Kumar, Hongkai Liu, Danny Marfatia

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of PittsburghU.S. Department of EnergyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsNeutrinoPhysicsParticle physicsSterile neutrinoElectroweak scaleStandard Model (mathematical formulation)Physics beyond the Standard ModelMAJORANAElectroweak interactionRenormalization groupEffective field theoryMajorana equationNeutrino oscillationTheoretical physicsGauge (firearms)Mathematical physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Standard Model Neutrino Effective Field Theory (SMNEFT) is an effective theory with Standard Model (SM) gauge-invariant operators constructed only from SM and right-handed neutrino fields. For the full set of dimension-six SMNEFT operators, we present the gauge coupling terms of the one-loop anomalous dimension matrix for renormalization group evolution (RGE) of the Wilson coefficients between a new physics scale and the electroweak scale. We find that the SMNEFT operators can be divided into five subsets which are closed under RGE. Our results apply for both Dirac and Majorana neutrinos. We also discuss the operator mixing pattern numerically and comment on some interesting phenomenological implications.

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)0.003
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 score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations27
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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