Beam-Polarization Asymmetries for the<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi>γ</mml:mi><mml:mo>→</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo><mml:mi>Λ</mml:mi></mml:math>and<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi>γ</mml:mi><mml:mo>→</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>Σ</mml:mi><mml:mn>0</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math>Reactions for<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi>γ</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.5</mml:mn><mml:mo>–</mml:mo><mml:mn>2.4</mml:mn><mml:mtext> </mml:mtext><mml:mtext> </mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">V</mml:mi></mml:math>
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Beam polarization asymmetries for the $p(\stackrel{\ensuremath{\rightarrow}}{\ensuremath{\gamma}},{K}^{+})\ensuremath{\Lambda}$ and $p(\stackrel{\ensuremath{\rightarrow}}{\ensuremath{\gamma}},{K}^{+}){\ensuremath{\Sigma}}^{0}$ reactions are measured for the first time for ${E}_{\ensuremath{\gamma}}=1.5--2.4\text{ }\mathrm{G}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}$ and $0.6<\mathrm{cos}({\ensuremath{\theta}}_{{K}^{+}}^{\mathrm{c}.\mathrm{m}.})<1.0$ by using linearly polarized photons at the Laser-Electron-Photon facility at SPring-8 (LEPS). The observed asymmetries are positive and gradually increase with rising photon energy. The data are not consistent with theoretical predictions based on tree-level effective-Lagrangian approaches. Including the new results in the development of the models is, therefore, crucial for understanding the reaction mechanism and to test the presence of baryon resonances which are predicted in quark models but are thus far undiscovered.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.010 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.018 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.019 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.017 | 0.017 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.128 | 0.015 |
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 it