MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4231396065 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2108.03992

Robust constraints on Lorentz Invariance Violation from H.E.S.S., MAGIC\n and VERITAS data combination

2021· preprint· en· W4231396065 on OpenAlexaff
J. Bolmont, Sami Caroff, M. Gaug, A. Gent, A. Jachołkowska, D. Kerszberg, Tony T.Y. Lin, M. Martı́nez, L. Nogués, A. N. Otte, C. Perennes, Michele Ronco, Tomislav Terzić

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNeutrino Physics Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMAGIC (telescope)Cherenkov radiationPhysicsLorentz covariancePulsarRedshiftAstrophysicsLorentz factorAstronomyLorentz transformationCrab PulsarParticle physicsGalaxyOpticsClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gamma-Ray bursts, flaring active galactic nuclei and pulsars are distant and\nenergetic astrophysical sources, detected up to tens of TeV with Imaging\nAtmospheric Cherenkov Telescopes (IACTs). Due to their high variability, they\nare the most suitable sources for energy-dependent time-delay searches related\nto Lorentz Invariance Violation (LIV) predicted by some Quantum Gravity (QG)\nmodels. However, these studies require large datasets. A working group between\nthe three major IACTs ground experiments - H.E.S.S., MAGIC and VERITAS - has\nbeen formed to address this issue and combine for the first time all the\nrelevant data collected by the three experiments in a joint analysis. This\nproceeding will review the new standard combination method. The likelihood\ntechnique used to deal with data from different source types and instruments\nwill be presented, as well as the way systematic uncertainties are taken into\naccount. The method has been developed and tested using simulations based on\npublished source observations from the three experiments. From these\nsimulations, the performance of the method will be assessed and new light will\nbe shed on time delays dependencies with redshift.\n

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.625
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.172
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.057 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicNeutrino Physics ResearchFrench-language works237,207