MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4407407112 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.111.034018

Data-driven results for light-quark connected and strange-plus-disconnected hadronic <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>g</mml:mi> <mml:mo>−</mml:mo> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> short- and long-distance windows

2025· article· en· W4407407112 on OpenAlexafffund
Genessa Benton, Diogo Boito, Maarten Golterman, A. Keshavarzi, Kim Maltman, Santiago Peris

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersH2020 European Research CouncilMinisterio de UniversidadesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoGeneralitat de CatalunyaRoyal SocietyFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São PauloU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsHadronParticle physicsPhysicsQuarkStrange quarkComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A key issue affecting the attempt to reduce the uncertainty on the Standard Model prediction for the muon anomalous magnetic moment is the current discrepancy between lattice-QCD and data-driven results for the hadronic vacuum polarization. Progress on this issue benefits from precise data-driven determinations of the isospin-limit light-quark-connected (lqc) and strange-plus-light-quark-disconnected ( s + lqd ) components of the related RBC/UKQCD windows. In this paper, using a strategy employed previously for the intermediate window, we provide data-driven results for the lqc and s + lqd components of the short- and long-distance RBC/UKQCD windows. Comparing these results with those from the lattice, we find significant discrepancies in the lqc parts but good agreement for the s + lqd components. We also explore the impact of recent CMD- 3 e + e − → π + π − cross section results, demonstrating that an upward shift in the ρ -peak region of the type seen in the CMD-3 data serves to eliminate the discrepancies for the lqc components without compromising the good agreement between lattice and data-driven s + lqd results.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.004

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations9
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.→Same topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies→French-language works237,207→