Systematically testing singlet models for (g − 2)μ
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We comprehensively study all viable new-physics scenarios that resolve the muon (g − 2)μ anomaly with only Standard Model singlet particles coupled to muons via renormalizable interactions. Since such models are only viable in the MeV–TeV mass range and require sizable muon couplings, they predict abundant accelerator production through the same interaction that resolves the anomaly. We find that a combination of fixed-target (NA64μ, M3), B-factory (BABAR, Belle II), and collider (LHC, muon collider) searches can cover nearly all viable singlets scenarios, independently of their decay modes. In particular, future muon collider searches offer the only certain test of singlets above the GeV scale, covering all higher masses up to the TeV-scale unitarity limit for these models. Intriguingly, we find that $$ \mathcal{O}\left(100\ \mathrm{GeV}\right) $$ O 100 GeV muon colliders may yield better coverage for GeV-scale singlets compared to TeV-scale concepts, which has important implications for the starting center-of-mass energy of a staged muon collider program.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".