SNOLab and its Implications for North American Underground Science Planning: Arguments for a "U.S. Kamioka"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We argue for a cost-effective, long-term North American underground science strategy based on partnership with Canada and initial construction of a modest U.S. Stage I laboratory designed to complement SNOLab. We show, by reviewing the requirements of detectors now in the R&D phase, that SNOLab and a properly designed U.S. Stage I facility would be capable of meeting the needs of North America's next wave of underground experiments. We discuss one opportunity for creating a Stage I laboratory, the Pioneer tunnel in Washington State, a site that could be developed to provide dedicated, clean, horizontal access. This unused tunnel, part of the deepest (1040 m) tunnel system in the U.S., would allow the U.S. to establish, at low risk and modest cost, a laboratory at a depth (2.12 km.w.e., or kilometers of water equivalent) quite similar to that of the Japanese laboratory Kamioka (2.04 km.w.e.). We describe studies of cosmic ray attenuation important to properly locating such a laboratory, and the tunnel improvements that would be required to produce an optimal Stage I facility. We also discuss possibilities for far-future Stage II (3.62 km.w.e.) and Stage III (5.00 km.w.e.) developments at the Pioneer tunnel, should future North American needs for deep space exceed those available at SNOLab.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".