MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3203407363 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac5027

On the Accuracy of Underground Muon Intensity Calculations

2022· article· en· W3203407363 on OpenAlexaff
Anatoli Fedynitch, William Woodley, M.-C. Piro

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of Science
KeywordsMuonPhysicsCosmic rayNuclear physicsDetectorHadronCOSMIC cancer databaseLeptonMuon colliderNeutrinoFlux (metallurgy)Phase spaceParticle physicsParticle acceleratorAstronomyBeam (structure)Optics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Cosmic-ray muons detected by deep underground and underwater detectors have served as an information source on the high-energy cosmic-ray spectrum and hadronic interactions in air showers for almost a century. The theoretical interest in underground muons has nearly faded away because space-borne experiments probe the cosmic-ray spectrum more directly, and accelerators provide precise measurements of hadron yields. However, underground muons probe unique hadron interaction energies and phase space, which are still inaccessible to present accelerator experiments. The cosmic-ray nucleon energies reach the hundred-TeV and PeV ranges, which are barely accessible with space-borne experiments. Our new calculation combines two modern computational tools: mceq for surface muon fluxes and proposal for underground transport. We demonstrate excellent agreement with measurements of cosmic-ray muon intensities underground within estimated errors. Beyond that, the precision of historical data turns out to be significantly smaller than our error estimates. This result shows that the sources of high-energy atmospheric lepton flux uncertainties at the surface or underground can be significantly constrained without taking more data or building new detectors. The reduction of uncertainties can be expected to impact data analyses at large-volume neutrino telescopes and be used for the design of future ton-scale direct dark matter detectors.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.862

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations16
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicAstrophysics and Cosmic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207