MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Connected and Disconnected Sea Partons from CT18 Parametrization of PDFs

2022· article· en· W3194896147 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Tie-Jiun Hou, Jian Liang, Keh-Fei Liu, Mengshi Yan, C.–P. Yuan

Bibliographic record

VenueSciPost Physics Proceedings · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOak Ridge National LaboratoryNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Energy Research Scientific Computing CenterU.S. Department of EnergyOffice of ScienceNational Science Foundation
KeywordsParametrization (atmospheric modeling)PartonAlgorithmPhysicsComputer scienceParticle physicsHadron

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The separation of the connected and disconnected sea partons, which were uncovered in the Euclidean path-integral formulation of the hadronic tensor, is accommodated with the CT18 parametrization of the global analysis of the parton distribution functions (PDFs). This is achieved with the help of the distinct small x <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mi>x</mml:mi> </mml:math> behaviors of these two sea parton components and the constraint from the lattice calculation of the ratio of the strange momentum fraction to that of the {\bar u} <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mover> <mml:mi>u</mml:mi> <mml:mo accent="true">‾</mml:mo> </mml:mover> </mml:math> or {\bar d} <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mover> <mml:mi>d</mml:mi> <mml:mo accent="true">‾</mml:mo> </mml:mover> </mml:math> in the disconnected insertion. This allows lattice calculations of separate flavors in both the connected and disconnected insertions to be directly compared with the global analysis results term by term.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.415
Threshold uncertainty score0.642

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.222 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSciPost Physics ProceedingsSame topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studiesFrench-language works237,207