| 1. |
- Schael, S, et al.
(författare)
-
Precision electroweak measurements on the Z resonance
- 2006
-
Ingår i: Physics Reports. - : Elsevier BV. - 0370-1573 .- 1873-6270. ; 427:5-6, s. 257-454
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- We report on the final electroweak measurements performed with data taken at the Z resonance by the experiments operating at the electron-positron colliders SLC and LEP. The data consist of 17 million Z decays accumulated by the ALEPH, DELPHI, L3 and OPAL experiments at LEP, and 600 thousand Z decays by the SLID experiment using a polarised beam at SLC. The measurements include cross-sections, forward-backward asymmetries and polarised asymmetries. The mass and width of the Z boson, m(Z) and Gamma(Z), and its couplings to fermions, for example the p parameter and the effective electroweak mixing angle for leptons, are precisely measured: m(Z) = 91.1875 +/- 0.0021 GeV, Gamma(Z) = 2.4952 +/- 0.0023 GeV, rho(l) = 1.0050 +/- 0.0010, sin(2)theta(eff)(lept) = 0.23153 +/- 0.00016. The number of light neutrino species is determined to be 2.9840 +/- 0.0082, in agreement with the three observed generations of fundamental fermions. The results are compared to the predictions of the Standard Model (SM). At the Z-pole, electroweak radiative corrections beyond the running of the QED and QCD coupling constants are observed with a significance of five standard deviations, and in agreement with the Standard Model. Of the many Z-pole measurements, the forward-backward asymmetry in b-quark production shows the largest difference with respect to its SM expectation, at the level of 2.8 standard deviations. Through radiative corrections evaluated in the framework of the Standard Model, the Z-pole data are also used to predict the mass of the top quark, m(t) = 173(+10)(+13) GeV, and the mass of the W boson, m(W) = 80.363 +/- 0.032 GeV. These indirect constraints are compared to the direct measurements, providing a stringent test of the SM. Using in addition the direct measurements of m(t) and m(W), the mass of the as yet unobserved SM Higgs boson is predicted with a relative uncertainty of about 50% and found to be less than 285 GeV at 95% confidence level. (c) 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
|
|
| 3. |
- Verdonschot, EH, et al.
(författare)
-
Developments in caries diagnosis and their relationship to treatment decisions and quality of care. ORCA Saturday Afternoon Symposium 1997
- 1999
-
Ingår i: Caries research. - : S. Karger AG. - 0008-6568 .- 1421-976X. ; 33:1, s. 32-40
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- This symposium report evaluates the achievements made in caries diagnostic research since the previous symposium held in 1992. The symposium aimed at presenting the state of the art of caries diagnostic methods, on presenting the links between caries diagnosis and subsequent treatment decisions and their effect on the treatment outcomes, particularly the quality of dental care. The variation among dentists in diagnosing (small) caries lesions and in treatment decision making is considerable. This has been explained by the imperfection of caries decision making tests, but also by making incorrect treatment decisions due to incorrect or partial understanding of diagnostic test parameters. Meta–analyses into the performance of caries diagnostic tests revealed that the available quantitative methods are very promising. It was concluded that these methods had high correlations with lesion depth. They were considered suitable to monitor small changes in lesions. Many obstacsel have been experienced in attempting to transfer the outcomes of diagnostic research into clinical practice and it was concluded that caries diagnosis researchers should co–operate with manufacturers to introducing valid new diagnostic tools to the market. Main research priorities for the coming 10 years are to conduct cost–effectiveness and cost–utility studies of caries diagnostic tools, to continue to review the performances of diagnostic tests, to transfer diagnostic knowledge and experience to the general practitioners particularly by constructing evidence–based clinical guide–lines, to study the relationship between diagnosis and treatment decision, and to assess the effect of diagnostic and treatment decisions on the outcome of care.
|
|
