MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7163028724 · doi:10.6082/k2fdc-6w378

Searching for Dark Matter with the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory

2021· dissertation· en· W7163028724 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Chicago · 2021
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicDark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDark matterNeutrinoObservatoryWarm dark matterWeakly interacting massive particlesHot dark matterPhysics beyond the Standard ModelScalar field dark matter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dark matter currently makes up approximately 84% of the matter in our universe, but has yet to be observed. A recent model by Grossman, Harnik, Telem, and Zhang proposes a new form of dark matter called self-destructing matter which could decay to standard model leptons after an interaction in Earth. Motivated by this model, in this analysis we perform two distinct analyses looking at high energy events in the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory data between 1999 and 2003. In the first, we perform a null hypothesis test on the data between 20 MeV and 10 GeV to look for any data which is not consistent with atmospheric neutrinos and find no evidence for new physics. In the second analysis we perform a dedicated search for back to back lepton pairs from a slow dark mediator in the self-destructing dark matter model. We find no evidence for the self-destructing dark matter and place new limits on the rate of these events.

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.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.391
Threshold uncertainty score0.457

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.198 · 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