MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4387687156 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2310.08827

Probing axion-like particles at the Electron-Ion Collider

2023· preprint· en· W4387687156 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Reuven Balkin, O. Hen, W. B. Li, Hongkai Liu, T. Ma, Yotam Soreq, M. Williams

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicDark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAzrieli FoundationIsrael Science FoundationU.S. Department of EnergyAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsColliderAxionNuclear physicsElectronParticle physicsPhotonLuminosityLambdaCalorimeter (particle physics)Range (aeronautics)DetectorCoupling (piping)Parameter spaceDark matterOpticsAstrophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Electron-Ion Collider~(EIC), a forthcoming powerful high-luminosity facility, represents an exciting opportunity to explore new physics. In this article, we study the potential of the EIC to probe the coupling between axion-like particles~(ALPs) and photons in coherent scattering. The ALPs can be produced via photon fusion and decay back to two photons inside the EIC detector. In a prompt-decay search, we find that the EIC can set the most stringent bound for $m_a \lesssim 20\,\GeV$ and probe the effective scales $Λ\lesssim 10^{5}\,$GeV. In a displaced-vertex search, which requires adopting an EM calorimeter technology that provides directionality, the EIC could probe ALPs with $m_a \lesssim 1\,\GeV$ at effective scales $Λ\lesssim 10^{7}\,\GeV$. Combining the two search strategies, the EIC can probe a significant portion of unexplored parameter space in the $0.2 < m_a <20\,\GeV$ mass range.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.138 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)→Same topicDark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena→French-language works237,207→