An investigation of the very rare $$ {K}^{+}\to {\pi}^{+}\nu \overline{\nu} $$ decay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The NA62 experiment reports an investigation of the $$ {K}^{+}\to {\pi}^{+}\nu \overline{\nu} $$ K + → π + ν ν ¯ mode from a sample of K+ decays collected in 2017 at the CERN SPS. The experiment has achieved a single event sensitivity of (0.389 ± 0.024) × 10−10, corresponding to 2.2 events assuming the Standard Model branching ratio of (8.4 ± 1.0) × 10−11. Two signal candidates are observed with an expected background of 1.5 events. Combined with the result of a similar analysis conducted by NA62 on a smaller data set recorded in 2016, the collaboration now reports an upper limit of 1.78 × 10−10 for the $$ {K}^{+}\to {\pi}^{+}\nu \overline{\nu} $$ K + → π + ν ν ¯ branching ratio at 90% CL. This, together with the corresponding 68% CL measurement of ( $$ {0.48}_{-0.48}^{+0.72} $$ 0.48 − 0.48 + 0.72 ) × 10−10, are currently the most precise results worldwide, and are able to constrain some New Physics models that predict large enhancements still allowed by previous measurements.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".