Admissibility frontier · Edition 3

Expanded claim page · assertion 3 of 3

the second gauge detector needs a phase reference

Experiment / protocolBuilder

Defines a measurement, sensitivity calculation or empirical decision rule. constructs a model, mechanism, calculation, protocol or intervention.

Exact assertion

The realistic experiment is now finite: choose a mass window, freeze the source-complete \(c_{BB}=0\) model, run the charged factorial settings and a signed photon or photon–Z reference scan, and profile lifetime, resolution and correlated backgrounds. Passing gives a justified reduced theory and a new detector capability. Releasing \(c_{BB}\) restores the exact null; a new-physics claim requires a replicated residual outside the complete seven-coordinate likelihood.

What this commits us to

The claim concerns a protocol, sensitivity or decision rule. It must be kept separate from a prediction that a nonzero signal exists.

Logical anatomy

Scope

Chapter “The admissibility frontier”, section “the second gauge detector needs a phase reference”. This is assertion 3 of 3 in that section.

Evidence posture

Separate predicted signal from sensitivity, calibration and decision protocol.

Research move

constructs a model, mechanism, calculation, protocol or intervention.

Verification route

  1. Recover the declared objects and assumptions from the controlling documents.
  2. Check the calculation, construction, obstruction or stopping rule on those same objects.
  3. Compare the source conclusion with the exact assertion above; do not strengthen its verbs or enlarge its domain.
  4. Apply the status rule and retain every named external dependency.

What would move or defeat this claim

Specify the apparatus, calibration, null distribution, preregistered threshold and independently predicted effect size.

Source map

Controlling documents