A Step Towards a Computing Grid for the LHC Experiments: ATLAS Data Challenge 1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ATLAS Collaboration at CERN is preparing for the data taking and analysis at the LHC that will start in 2007. Therefore, a series of Data Challenges was started in 2002 whose goals are the validation of the Computing Model, of the complete software suite, of the data model, and to ensure the correctness of the technical choices to be made. A major feature of the first Data Challenge was the preparation and the deployment of the software required for the production of large event samples as a worldwide-distributed activity. It should be noted that it was not an option to ''run everything at CERN'' even if we had wanted to; the resources were not available at CERN to carry out the production on a reasonable time-scale. The great challenge of organizing and then carrying out this large-scale production at a significant number of sites around the world had the refore to be faced. However, the benefits of this are manifold: apart from realizing the required computing resources, this exercise created worldwide momentum for ATLAS computing as a whole. This report describes in detail the main steps carried out in DC1 and what has been learned from them as a step towards a computing Grid for the LHC experiments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".