MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7058177507

Measurement of the W boson polarization in top decay at CDF at root s=1.8 TeV

2005· article· en· W7058177507 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePurdue e-Pubs (Purdue University System) · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
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
KeywordsElectroweak interactionHelicityLeptonPolarization (electrochemistry)Top quarkInvariant massParticle decayObservableStandard Model (mathematical formulation)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The polarization of the W boson in t-->Wb decay is unambiguously predicted by the standard model of electroweak interactions and is a powerful test of our understanding of the tbW vertex. We measure this polarization from the invariant mass of the b quark from t-->Wb and the lepton from W-->lnu whose momenta measure the W decay angle and direction of motion, respectively. In this paper we present a measurement of the decay rate (f(V+A)) of the W produced from the decay of the top quark in the hypothesis of V+A structure of the tWb vertex. We find no evidence for the nonstandard V+A vertex and set a limit on f(V+A) < 0.80 at 95% confidence level. By combining this result with a complementary observable in the same data, we assign a limit on f(V+A) < 0.61 at 95% CL. This corresponds to a constraint on the right-handed helicity component of the W polarization of f(+)<0.18 at 95% CL. This limit is the first significant direct constraint on f(V+A) in top decay.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.614
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.184 · 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.

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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePurdue e-Pubs (Purdue University System)Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207