MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3095969774 · doi:10.1142/9789814405072_0052

Combined Analysis of all Three Phases of Solar Neutrino Data from the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory

2012· book-chapter· en· W3095969774 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
J. Maneira

Bibliographic record

VenueAstroparticle, particle, space physics, radiation interaction, detectors and medical physics applications · 2012
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNeutrino Physics Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Colorado BoulderUniversity of California, DavisIndustry CanadaTechnische Universität Dresden
KeywordsSolar neutrinoObservatoryNeutrinoAstronomySolar observatorySolar neutrino problemPhysicsAstrophysicsNeutrino oscillationNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report results from a combined analysis of solar neutrino data from all phases of the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory. By exploiting particle identification information obtained from the proportional counters installed during the third phase, this analysis improved background rejection in that phase of the experiment. The combined analysis resulted in a total flux of active neutrino flavors from 8B decays in the Sun of (5.25 \pm 0.16(stat.)+0.11-0.13(syst.))\times10^6 cm^{-2}s^{-1}. A two-flavor neutrino oscillation analysis yielded \Deltam^2_{21} = (5.6^{+1.9}_{-1.4})\times10^{-5} eV^2 and tan^2θ_{12}= 0.427^{+0.033}_{-0.029}. A three-flavor neutrino oscillation analysis combining this result with results of all other solar neutrino experiments and the KamLAND experiment yielded \Deltam^2_{21} = (7.41^{+0.21}_{-0.19})\times10^{-5} eV^2, tan^2θ_{12} = 0.446^{+0.030}_{-0.029}, and sin^2θ_{13} = (2.5^{+1.8}_{-1.5})\times10^{-2}. This implied an upper bound of sin^2θ_{13} < 0.053 at the 95% confidence level (C.L.).

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.529
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations41
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstroparticle, particle, space physics, radiation interaction, detectors and medical physics applicationsSame topicNeutrino Physics ResearchFrench-language works237,207