MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Searching for Solar Axions Using Data from the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory

2021· article· en· W3134205625 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aagaman Bhusal, Nick Houston, Tianjun Li

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicDark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaChinese Government ScholarshipChinese Academy of SciencesNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsAxionPhysicsParticle physicsNucleonNeutrinoNuclear physicsSolar neutrinoNeutronParameter spaceNeutron starDark matterAstrophysicsNeutrino oscillation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We explore a novel detection possibility for solar axions, which relies only on their couplings to nucleons, via the axion-induced dissociation of deuterons into their constituent neutrons and protons. An opportune target for this process is the now-concluded Sudbury Neutrino Observatory (SNO) experiment, which relied upon large quantities of heavy water to resolve the solar neutrino problem. From the full SNO dataset we exclude in a model-independent fashion isovector axion-nucleon couplings |g_{aN}^{3}|≡1/2|g_{an}-g_{ap}|>2×10^{-5} GeV^{-1} at 95% C.L. for sub-MeV axion masses, covering previously unexplored regions of the axion parameter space. In the absence of a precise cancellation between g_{an} and g_{ap} this result also exceeds comparable constraints from other laboratory experiments, and excludes regions of the parameter space for which astrophysical constraints from SN1987A and neutron star cooling are inapplicable due to axion trapping.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations46
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicDark Matter and Cosmic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207