MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7008887511

Constraints on Solar Axions Using the Profile Likelihood Ratio Method with the SuperCDMS Experiments

2024· article· en· W7008887511 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSMU Scholar (Southern Methodist University) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicDark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAxionDark matterWeakly interacting massive particlesSubatomic particleSensitivity (control systems)Range (aeronautics)Coupling (piping)Physics beyond the Standard Model
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dark matter plays an essential role in understanding modern physics and particles beyond the Standard Model. Evidence suggests that dark matter accounts for approximately 85% of the universe’s matter, and 26.8% of its mass-energy composition. Key candidates for dark matter include unidentified subatomic particles like Weakly Interacting Massive Particles (WIMPs) and axions. The Super Cryogenic Dark Matter Search (SuperCDMS) employs direct detection methods to identify these elusive particles using cryogenic technologies. Su- perCDMS Soudan is the latest completed CDMS experiment in Minnesota, in preparation for the next phase experiments of SuperCDMS SNOLAB in Sudbury, Canada. At SNOLAB, the Cryogenic Underground TEst (CUTE) facility is dedicated to analyze background levels prior to the full operation of SuperCDMS SNOLAB experiments. Utilizing collected data from CDMSlite Run 3 at Soudan Underground Laboratory with minimized background interference, sensitivity limits were established for solar axions within the keV energy range using the profile likelihood ratio method. Our results show an axio-electric coupling constant constraints g_ae < 5.91×10^–11 from the atomic recombination and de-excitation, Bremsstrahlung, and Compton channels at a 90% confidence level.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.879
Threshold uncertainty score0.691

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSMU Scholar (Southern Methodist University)Same topicDark Matter and Cosmic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207