MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3136526988 · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03256-1

Detection of a particle shower at the Glashow resonance with IceCube

2021· article· en· W3136526988 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueNature · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaSnolab
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceDeutsches Elektronen-SynchrotronScience and Technology Facilities CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOffice of Polar ProgramsCollege of Engineering, Michigan State UniversityHelmholtz Alliance for Astroparticle PhysicsInstitute for Global Prominent Research, Chiba UniversityRWTH Aachen UniversityChiba UniversityKnut och Alice Wallenbergs StiftelseVillum FondenNational Research Foundation of KoreaFonds Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekMarsden FundBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungDanmarks GrundforskningsfondSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science FoundationBelgian Federal Science Policy OfficeDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftMichigan State UniversityNational Research FoundationWestern Canada Research GridFonds De La Recherche Scientifique - FNRSPolarforskningssekretariatetUniversity of OxfordCompute CanadaMarquette UniversityUniversity of Wisconsin-MadisonU.S. Department of EnergyVetenskapsrådet
KeywordsNeutrinoMuonCherenkov radiationHadronResonance (particle physics)Elementary particleAir showerNeutrino astronomyStandard Model (mathematical formulation)Physics beyond the Standard Model

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations177
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueNatureSame topicAstrophysics and Cosmic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207