Pith.

High Energy Physics - Phenomenology · arXiv:hep-ph/0502095 v1 · submitted 10 Feb 2005

Supersymmetry and precision data after LEP2

Guido Marandella, Christian Schappacher, Alessandro Strumia

The paper says

“Adding LEP2 e ebar –> f fbar cross sections to the data-set removes previous hints for SUSY and the resulting constraints are in some cases stronger than direct bounds on sparticle masses.”

from the abstract · picked out as the main claim by a classifier

Pith says

Pith has not reviewed this paper.

Get a Pith Review, $5

Reviews

Reviews by people

No person has reviewed this paper on Pith yet. A scientist listed on Pith can review it for a fee, and their review is published here whatever it concludes.

Request a human review

How Pith checks papers · The full audit of this paper

The paper

Abstract

We study one loop supersymmetric corrections to precision observables. Adding LEP2 e ebar –> f fbar cross sections to the data-set removes previous hints for SUSY and the resulting constraints are in some cases stronger than direct bounds on sparticle masses. We consider specific models: split SUSY, CMSSM, gauge mediation, anomaly and radion mediation. Beyond performing a complete one-loop analysis, we also develop a simple approximation, based on the Shat, That, W, Y `universal' parameters. SUSY corrections give W,Y > 0 and mainly depend on the left-handed slepton and squark masses, on M_2 and on mu.

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. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

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

How the main claim is stated: asserted 0.98

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.04 · states limitation 0.16 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.10 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.14 · compares with prior results 0.89 · mentions code or data availability 0.02

The abstract, sentence by sentence

This table labels the abstract only (arXiv listing abstract v1). The number is the probability the classifier gave the label.

SentenceRoleThe authors' own workStates the main conclusionStrength
We study one loop supersymmetric corrections to precision observables. contribution 0.99 0.89 0.03 asserted 0.67
Adding LEP2 e ebar --> f fbar cross sections to the data-set removes previous hints for SUSY and the resulting constraints are in some cases stronger than direct bounds on sparticle masses. result 0.98 0.79 0.79 asserted 0.98
We consider specific models: split SUSY, CMSSM, gauge mediation, anomaly and radion mediation. method 0.65 0.74 0.04 asserted 0.85
Beyond performing a complete one-loop analysis, we also develop a simple approximation, based on the Shat, That, W, Y `universal' parameters. method 0.58 0.94 0.05 asserted 1.00
SUSY corrections give W,Y > 0 and mainly depend on the left-handed slepton and squark masses, on M_2 and on mu. result 0.98 0.84 0.13 asserted 1.00

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: theoretical result 0.85 · evidence from analysis of existing data 0.84

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

How the labels were made

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 4,227 input tokens, $0.0002 reported.

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. This record as JSON

Cited by 11 Pith papers
How the literature uses it

8 arXiv papers cite this in 13 sentences

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Papers citing it · 10 sentences without a confident label

Compares with it 1 paper
Cites it as background 2 papers

Challenges and discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment.

No comments yet.

Sign in to comment