MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6977317110 · doi:10.60692/tbaym-rtc61

Updated T2K measurements of muon neutrino and antineutrino disappearance using 3.6×1021 protons on target

2023· article· en· W6977317110 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueGreater South Information System · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNeutrino Physics Research
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of ReginaUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeutrino oscillationNeutrinoMuon neutrinoMuonMeasurements of neutrino speedOscillation (cell signaling)Solar neutrino problemSolar neutrino

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Muon neutrino and antineutrino disappearance probabilities are identical in the standard three-flavor neutrino oscillation framework, but $CPT$ violation and nonstandard interactions can violate this symmetry. In this work we report the measurements of ${\mathrm{sin}}^{2}{\ensuremath{\theta}}_{23}$ and $\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Delta}}{m}_{32}^{2}$ independently for neutrinos and antineutrinos. The aforementioned symmetry violation would manifest as an inconsistency in the neutrino and antineutrino oscillation parameters. The analysis discussed here uses a total of $1.97\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{21}$ and $1.63\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{21}$ protons on target taken with a neutrino and antineutrino beam respectively, and benefits from improved flux and cross section models, new near-detector samples and more than double the data reducing the overall uncertainty of the result. No significant deviation is observed, consistent with the standard neutrino oscillation picture.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreater South Information SystemSame topicNeutrino Physics ResearchFrench-language works237,207