Pith. Sign in

RECORD

Top quark property measurements at the LHC

PaperPDF from arXiv

data files

Paper breakdownThe authors' claims, conditions and measurements, as JSON Signed receiptProof this review has not been altered
X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit Hacker News
Richard Hawkings

High Energy Physics - Experiment · Submitted 29 Oct 2014

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review

The authors' main claim The measurements are generally in good agreement with predictions from next-to-leading-order QCD calculations, and no deviations from Standard Model expectations have been seen.

how it is stated · asserted 0.89 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗
Cite ▾
arXiv ID1410.8053 (version 1)
Pith IDSNPFE4DN, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review
CitationRichard Hawkings. "Top quark property measurements at the LHC." arXiv:1410.8053 (2014). https://pith.science/paper/SNPFE4DN
Claim paper

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Open the compiled record

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 2,307 input tokens, $0.0001 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.02 · states limitation 0.11 · human participants 0.02 · controlled comparison 0.17 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.05 · compares with prior results 0.55 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; .

Measurements of top quark properties performed at the Large Hadron Collider are reviewed, with a particular emphasis on top-pair charge asymmetries, spin correlations and polarization measurements performed by the ATLAS and CMS collaborations. The measurements are generally in good agreement with predictions from next-to-leading-order QCD calculations, and no deviations from Standard Model expectations have been seen.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#sentencerolethe authors' own workstates the main conclusionstrength
s0 Measurements of top quark properties performed at the Large Hadron Collider are reviewed, with a particular emphasis on top-pair charge asymmetries, spin correlations and polarization measurements performed by the ATLAS and CMS collaborations. contribution 0.93 0.11 0.08 asserted 0.82
s1 The measurements are generally in good agreement with predictions from next-to-leading-order QCD calculations, and no deviations from Standard Model expectations have been seen. result 0.70 0.14 0.79 asserted 0.89

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: review 1.00 · evidence from literature 0.70.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read
  • arXiv listing abstract v1
not examined
  • full text
  • figures and tables
  • references and citing sentences
  • relations to other papers
levels run
  • P abstract
not run
  • S sections
  • T body sentences
  • C citations
  • R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

The paper
Original abstract

Measurements of top quark properties performed at the Large Hadron Collider are reviewed, with a particular emphasis on top-pair charge asymmetries, spin correlations and polarization measurements performed by the ATLAS and CMS collaborations. The measurements are generally in good agreement with predictions from next-to-leading-order QCD calculations, and no deviations from Standard Model expectations have been seen.

Human review

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

Discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.