MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1567444545 · doi:10.2172/1304777

Simplified Models for Dark Matter and Missing Energy Searches at the LHC

2014· report· en· W1567444545 on OpenAlexaff
Jalal Abdallah, Adi Ashkenazi, A. Boveia, Giorgio Busoni, Andrea De Simone, C. Doglioni, Aielet Efrati, Erez Etzion, Johanna Gramling, Thomas S. Jacques, Tongyan Lin, Enrico Morgante, Michele Papucci, Bjoern Penning, Antonio Riotto, Thomas G. Rizzo, David Šálek, S. Schramm, Oren Slone, Yotam Soreq, Alessandro Vichi, Tomer Volansky, Itay Yavin, Ning Zhou, Kathryn Zurek

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLarge Hadron ColliderMissing energyInterpretation (philosophy)PhysicsDark matterPhysics beyond the Standard ModelParticle physicsField (mathematics)CollisionStandard Model (mathematical formulation)Dark energyChannel (broadcasting)Energy (signal processing)Theoretical physicsComputer scienceCosmologyAstrophysicsNuclear physicsMathematicsQuantum mechanicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study of collision events with missing energy as searches for the dark matter (DM) component of the Universe are an essential part of the extensive program looking for new physics at the LHC. Given the unknown nature of DM, the interpretation of such searches should be made broad and inclusive. This report reviews the usage of simplified models in the interpretation of missing energy searches. We begin with a brief discussion of the utility and limitation of the effective field theory approach to this problem. The bulk of the report is then devoted to several different simplified models and their signatures, including s-channel and t-channel processes. A common feature of simplified models for DM is the presence of additional particles that mediate the interactions between the Standard Model and the particle that makes up DM. We consider these in detail and emphasize the importance of their inclusion as final states in any coherent interpretation. We also review some of the experimental progress in the field, new signatures, and other aspects of the searches themselves. We conclude with comments and recommendations regarding the use of simplified models in Run-II of the LHC.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.259 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations93
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studiesFrench-language works237,207