MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6990175255

Dalitz plot analysis of the decay B±âK±K±K

2006· article· en· W6990175255 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship (California Digital Library) · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum Chromodynamics and Particle Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSLAC National Accelerator LaboratoryInstitut National de Physique Nucléaire et de Physique des ParticulesU.S. Department of EnergyEuropean CommissionInstitute of High Energy PhysicsCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungAlfred P. Sloan FoundationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlexander von Humboldt-StiftungDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftNational Science Foundation
KeywordsDalitz plotIsobarBranching fractionMeasure (data warehouse)AsymmetryParticle decayCP violation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We analyze the three-body charmless decay B±→K±K± K using a sample of 226.0±2.5 million BB̄ pairs collected by the BABAR detector. We measure the total branching fraction and CP asymmetry to be B=(35.2±0.9±1.6)×10-6 and ACP=(-1.7±2.6±1.5)%. We fit the Dalitz plot distribution using an isobar model and measure the magnitudes and phases of the decay coefficients. We find no evidence of CP violation for the individual components of the isobar model. The decay dynamics is dominated by the K+K- S-wave, for which we perform a partial-wave analysis in the region m(K+K-) < 2GeV/c2. Significant production of the f0(980) resonance, and of a spin zero state near 1.55GeV/c2 are required in the isobar model description of the data. The partial-wave analysis supports this observation. © 2006 The 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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship (California Digital Library)Same topicQuantum Chromodynamics and Particle InteractionsFrench-language works237,207