MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7039481113

Measurement of the azimuthal angle distribution of leptons from W boson decays as a function of the W transverse momentum in p(p)over-bar collisions at root s = 1.8 TeV

2006· article· en· W7039481113 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePurdue e-Pubs (Purdue University System) · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicLabor Market and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaIstituto Nazionale di Fisica NucleareNational Science CouncilAlfred P. Sloan FoundationFermilabU.S. Department of EnergySchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungRussian Foundation for Basic ResearchMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsTevatronLeptonJet (fluid)Transverse planeLuminosityQuantum chromodynamicsStandard Model (mathematical formulation)Azimuth
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the first measurement of the A(2) and A(3) angular coefficients of the W boson produced in proton-antiproton collisions. We study W -> e nu(e) and W ->mu nu(mu) candidate events produced in association with at least one jet at CDF, during Run Ia and Run Ib of the Tevatron at root s=1.8 TeV. The corresponding integrated luminosity was 110 pb(-1). The jet balances the transverse momentum of the W and introduces QCD effects in W boson production. The extraction of the angular coefficients is achieved through the direct measurement of the azimuthal angle of the charged lepton in the Collins-Soper rest-frame of the W boson. The angular coefficients are measured as a function of the transverse momentum of the W boson. The electron, muon, and combined results are in good agreement with the standard model prediction, up to order alpha(s)(2) in QCD.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.165
Teacher spread0.153 · 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 designObservational
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 venuePurdue e-Pubs (Purdue University System)Same topicLabor Market and EducationFrench-language works237,207