MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Bounds on <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" altimg="si1.svg"><mml:msubsup><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>μ</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HVP</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">LO</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:math> using Hölder's inequalities and finite-energy QCD sum rules

2024· article· lv· W4402857826 on OpenAlexafffund
Siyuan Li, T. G. Steele, J. Ho, Reehana Raza, Karina Williams, R. T. Kleiv

Bibliographic record

VenueNuclear and Particle Physics Proceedings · 2024
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum Chromodynamics and Particle Interactions
Canadian institutionsThompson Rivers UniversityUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsScalable Vector GraphicsAlgorithmMathematicsComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study establishes bounds on the leading-order (LO) hadronic vacuum polarization (HVP) contribution to the anomalous magnetic moment of the muon ( a μ HVP , LO , a μ = ( g − 2 ) μ / 2 ) by using Hölder's inequality and related inequalities in Finite-Energy QCD sum rules. Considering contributions from light quarks ( u , d , s ) up to five-loop order in perturbation theory within the chiral limit, leading-order light-quark mass corrections, next-to-leading order for dimension-four QCD condensates, and leading-order for dimension-six QCD condensates, the study finds QCD lower and upper bounds as ( 657.0 ± 34.8 ) × 10 − 10 ≤ a μ HVP , LO ≤ ( 788.4 ± 41.8 ) × 10 − 10 .

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.008
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.005

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.223 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNuclear and Particle Physics ProceedingsSame topicQuantum Chromodynamics and Particle InteractionsFrench-language works237,207