T2K measurements of muon neutrino and antineutrino disappearance using <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn>3.13</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mn>10</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>21</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math> protons on target
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report measurements by the T2K experiment of the parameters ${\ensuremath{\theta}}_{23}$ and $\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Delta}}{m}_{32}^{2}$, which govern the disappearance of muon neutrinos and antineutrinos in the three-flavor PMNS neutrino oscillation model at T2K's neutrino energy and propagation distance. Utilizing the ability of the experiment to run with either a mainly neutrino or a mainly antineutrino beam, muon-like events from each beam mode are used to measure these parameters separately for neutrino and antineutrino oscillations. Data taken from $1.49\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{21}$ protons on target (POT) in neutrino mode and $1.64\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{21}$ POT in antineutrino mode are used. The best-fit values obtained by T2K were ${\mathrm{sin}}^{2}({\ensuremath{\theta}}_{23})={0.51}_{\ensuremath{-}0.07}^{+0.06}({0.43}_{\ensuremath{-}0.05}^{+0.21})$ and $\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Delta}}{m}_{32}^{2}={2.47}_{\ensuremath{-}0.09}^{+0.08}({2.50}_{\ensuremath{-}0.13}^{+0.18})\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{\ensuremath{-}3}\text{ }\text{ }{\mathrm{eV}}^{2}/{c}^{4}$ for neutrinos (antineutrinos). No significant differences between the values of the parameters describing the disappearance of muon neutrinos and antineutrinos were observed. An analysis using an effective two-flavor neutrino oscillation model where the sine of the mixing angle is allowed to take nonphysical values larger than 1 is also performed to check the consistency of our data with the three-flavor model. Our data were found to be consistent with a physical value for the mixing angle.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".