The T2K Neutrino Flux Prediction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Tokai-to-Kamioka (T2K) experiment studies neutrino oscillations using an o -axis muon \nneutrino beam with a peak energy of about 0.6 GeV that originates at the J-PARC accelerator \nfacility. Interactions of the neutrinos are observed at near detectors placed at 280 m from the \nproduction target and at the far detector { Super-Kamiokande (SK) { located 295 km away. The \n \nux prediction is an essential part of the successful prediction of neutrino interaction rates at the T2K \ndetectors and is an important input to T2K neutrino oscillation and cross section measurements. \nA FLUKA and GEANT3 based simulation models the physical processes involved in the neutrino \n3 \nproduction, from the interaction of primary beam protons in the T2K target, to the decay of hadrons \nand muons that produce neutrinos. The simulation uses proton beam monitor measurements as \ninputs. The modeling of hadronic interactions is re-weighted using thin target hadron production \ndata, including recent charged pion and kaon measurements from the NA61/SHINE experiment. \nFor the rst T2K analyses the uncertainties on the \nux prediction are evaluated to be below 15% \nnear the \nux peak. The uncertainty on the ratio of the \nux predictions at the far and near detectors \nis less than 2 % near the \nux peak
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".