MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297860485 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1107.3875

Search for a Heavy Top-Like Quark in p\bar{p} Collisions at {\surd}s = 1.96 TeV

2011· article· en· W4297860485 on OpenAlexfundno aff
T Aaltonen, B Alvarez Gonzalez, S Amerio, D Amidei, A Anastassov, A Annovi, J Antos, G Apollinari, J A Appel, A Apresyan, T Arisawa

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Explorer (The University of Manchester) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFermilabIstituto Nazionale di Fisica NucleareCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlfred P. Sloan FoundationNational Science CouncilScience and Technology Facilities CouncilNational Research FoundationNational Research Foundation of KoreaSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungU.S. Department of EnergyRussian Foundation for Basic ResearchMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsParticle physicsBar (unit)Nuclear physicsTop quarkLarge Hadron Collider

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the results of a search for pair production of a heavy top-like (t') quark decaying to Wq final states using data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 5.6 fb-1 collected by the CDF II detector in pp collisions at {\surd}s = 1.96 TeV. We perform parallel searches for t' \to Wb and t' \to Wq (where q is a generic down-type quark) in events containing a lepton and four or more jets. By performing a fit to the two-dimensional distribution of total transverse energy versus reconstructed t quark mass, we set upper limits on the t \bar{t} production cross section and exclude a standard model fourth-generation t' quark decaying to W b (W q) with mass below 358 (340) GeV/c2 at 95% CL.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.715
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Explorer (The University of Manchester)Same topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studiesFrench-language works237,207