What if the Mass Difference $\\Delta M_s$ is around 18 Inverse Picoseconds?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Present experiments in pursuit of the mass difference in the Bs-Bs(bar) system have put a lower bound on this quantity of $\Delta M_s > 14.9 ps^{-1}$ (at 95% C.L.). The same experiments also yield a local minimum in the log-likelihood function around $\Delta M_s = 17.7 ps^{-1}$, which is $2.5\sigma$ away from being zero. Motivated by these observations, we investigate the consequences of a possible measurement of $\Delta M_s = 17.7 \pm 1.4 ps^{-1}$, in the context of both the standard model and supersymmetric models with minimal flavor violation. We perform a fit of the quark mixing parameters in these theories and estimate the expected ranges of the CP asymmetries in B decays, characterized by $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\gamma$, the interior angles of the CKM-unitarity triangle. Based on this study, we argue that, if indeed $\Delta M_s$ turns out to be in its currently-favored range, this would disfavor a large class of supersymmetric models. Indeed, of all the models examined here, the best fit to the data occurs for the standard model.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".