MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6987631606

Tensor interaction limit derived from the α-β-ν correlation in trapped Li8 ions

2013· article· en· W6987631606 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCivil War Book Review · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear physics research studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersArgonne National LaboratoryNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNorthwestern UniversityLawrence Livermore National LaboratoryU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsTensor (intrinsic definition)AmplitudeLimit (mathematics)IonComponent (thermodynamics)CorrelationSpectrum (functional analysis)Energy (signal processing)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A measurement of the α-β-ν̄ angular correlation in the Gamow-Teller decay Li8→Be*8+ν̄+β, Be*8→ α+α has been performed using ions confined in a linear Paul trap surrounded by silicon detectors. The energy difference spectrum of the α particles emitted along and opposite the direction of the β particle is consistent with the standard model prediction and places a limit of 3.1% (95.5% confidence level) on any tensor contribution to the decay. From this result, the amplitude of any tensor component CT relative to that of the dominant axial-vector component CA of the electroweak interaction is limited to |CT/CA|<0.18 (95.5% confidence level). This experimental approach is facilitated by several favorable features of the Li8 β decay and has different systematic effects than the previous β-ν̄ correlation results for a pure Gamow-Teller transition obtained from studying He6 β decay. © 2013 American Physical Society.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCivil War Book ReviewSame topicNuclear physics research studiesFrench-language works237,207