Pith. Sign in

RECORD

Search for Baryons in the Radiative Penguin Decay b--> s gamma

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
K. W. Edwards, et al. (CLEO Collaboration)

High Energy Physics - Experiment · Submitted 5 May 2003

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

The authors' main claim We find no evidence for either, and set 90% confidence level upper limits for photons with B rest frame energy greater than 2.0 GeV of [Br(B^- -> \Lambda p-bar \gamma) + 0.3 Br(B^- -> \Sigma^0 p-bar \gamma)] < 3.3 x 10^-6, [Br(B^- -> \Sigma^0 p-bar \gamma) + 0.4 Br(B^- -> \Lambda p-bar \gamma)] < 6.4 x 10^-6.

how it is stated · asserted 1.00 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗
Cite ▾
arXiv IDhep-ex/0305005 (version 1)
Pith IDM6YFIRBP, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review
Citationet al. (CLEO Collaboration), K. W. Edwards. "Search for Baryons in the Radiative Penguin Decay b--> s gamma." arXiv:hep-ex/0305005 (2003). https://pith.science/paper/M6YFIRBP
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, 4,050 input tokens, $0.0002 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.04 · states limitation 0.74 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.05 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.99 · compares with prior results 0.78 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

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

We have searched for the baryon-containing radiative penguin decays B^- -> \Lambda p-bar \gamma and B^- -> \Sigma^0 p-bar \gamma, using a sample of 9.7 million BBbar events collected at the \Upsilon(4S) with the CLEO detector. We find no evidence for either, and set 90% confidence level upper limits for photons with B rest frame energy greater than 2.0 GeV of [Br(B^- -> \Lambda p-bar \gamma) + 0.3 Br(B^- -> \Sigma^0 p-bar \gamma)] < 3.3 x 10^-6, [Br(B^- -> \Sigma^0 p-bar \gamma) + 0.4 Br(B^- -> \Lambda p-bar \gamma)] < 6.4 x 10^-6. From the latter, we estimate (for photons with B rest frame energy greater than 2.0 GeV) Br(B -> X_s \gamma, X_s containing baryons) < 3.8 x 10^-5. This limit implies upper limits on corrections to CLEO's recent measurement of branching fraction, mean photon energy, and variance in photon energy from b -> s \gamma that are less than half the combined statistical and systematic errors quoted on these quantities.

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 We have searched for the baryon-containing radiative penguin decays B^- -> \Lambda p-bar \gamma and B^- -> \Sigma^0 p-bar \gamma, using a sample of 9.7 million BBbar events collected at the \Upsilon(4S) with the CLEO detector. contribution 0.61 0.97 0.04 asserted 0.98
s1 We find no evidence for either, and set 90% confidence level upper limits for photons with B rest frame energy greater than 2.0 GeV of [Br(B^- -> \Lambda p-bar \gamma) + 0.3 Br(B^- -> \Sigma^0 p-bar \gamma)] < 3.3 x 10^-6, [Br(B^- -> \Sigma^0 p-bar \gamma) + 0.4 Br(B^- -> \Lambda p-bar \gamma)] < 6.4 x 10^-6. result 1.00 0.97 0.80 asserted 1.00
s2 From the latter, we estimate (for photons with B rest frame energy greater than 2.0 GeV) Br(B -> X_s \gamma, X_s containing baryons) < 3.8 x 10^-5. result 0.89 0.94 0.18 asserted 0.87
s3 This limit implies upper limits on corrections to CLEO's recent measurement of branching fraction, mean photon energy, and variance in photon energy from b -> s \gamma that are less than half the combined statistical and systematic errors quoted on these quantities. interpretation 1.00 0.79 0.17 asserted 0.89

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: empirical study 1.00 · evidence from observation or experiment 0.79.

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

We have searched for the baryon-containing radiative penguin decays B^- -> \Lambda p-bar \gamma and B^- -> \Sigma^0 p-bar \gamma, using a sample of 9.7 million BBbar events collected at the \Upsilon(4S) with the CLEO detector. We find no evidence for either, and set 90% confidence level upper limits for photons with B rest frame energy greater than 2.0 GeV of [Br(B^- -> \Lambda p-bar \gamma) + 0.3 Br(B^- -> \Sigma^0 p-bar \gamma)] < 3.3 x 10^-6, [Br(B^- -> \Sigma^0 p-bar \gamma) + 0.4 Br(B^- -> \Lambda p-bar \gamma)] < 6.4 x 10^-6. From the latter, we estimate (for photons with B rest frame energy greater than 2.0 GeV) Br(B -> X_s \gamma, X_s containing baryons) < 3.8 x 10^-5. This limit implies upper limits on corrections to CLEO's recent measurement of branching fraction, mean photon energy, and variance in photon energy from b -> s \gamma that are less than half the combined statistical and systematic errors quoted on these quantities.

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.