Pith. Sign in

RECORD

Mean Square Radius of EAS Electrons

Astrophysics · Submitted 20 Jun 2001

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

The authors' main claim A very simple approximation formula, which allows joint description of all our results obtained in wide primary energy range and for different observation depths is presented.

how it is stated · asserted 1.00 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗
Cite ▾
arXiv IDastro-ph/0106363 (version 1)
Pith IDNA4W36BT, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review
CitationA.A.Lagutin, A.Misaki, N.Inoue, R.I.Raikin. "Mean Square Radius of EAS Electrons." arXiv:astro-ph/0106363 (2001). https://pith.science/paper/NA4W36BT
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-1.13.0 via TypeSafe API, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 2,894 input tokens.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.05 · states limitation 0.13 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.03 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.08 · compares with prior results 0.22 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

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

Detailed theoretical study of the mean square radius of extensive air shower electrons has been made in connection with further development of scaling formalism for electron lateral distribution function. A very simple approximation formula, which allows joint description of all our results obtained in wide primary energy range and for different observation depths is presented. The sensitivity of the mean square radius to variations of basic parameters of hadronic interaction model is discussed.

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 Detailed theoretical study of the mean square radius of extensive air shower electrons has been made in connection with further development of scaling formalism for electron lateral distribution function. contribution 0.94 0.87 0.09 asserted 0.99
s1 A very simple approximation formula, which allows joint description of all our results obtained in wide primary energy range and for different observation depths is presented. contribution 0.64 0.91 0.49 asserted 1.00
s2 The sensitivity of the mean square radius to variations of basic parameters of hadronic interaction model is discussed. contribution 0.47 0.72 0.08 asserted 0.73

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: theoretical result 0.94 · evidence from proof or derivation 0.53.

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

Detailed theoretical study of the mean square radius of extensive air shower electrons has been made in connection with further development of scaling formalism for electron lateral distribution function. A very simple approximation formula, which allows joint description of all our results obtained in wide primary energy range and for different observation depths is presented. The sensitivity of the mean square radius to variations of basic parameters of hadronic interaction model is discussed.

Human review

Discussion

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