MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019055902 · doi:10.1088/1748-0221/3/02/p02002

Energy calibration of the ATLAS Liquid Argon Forward Calorimeter

2008· article· en· W2019055902 on OpenAlexaff
J. P. Archambault, A. Artamonov, M. Cadabeschi, Vladimir Epshteyn, C. Galt, P. A. Gorbounov, L. Heelan, M. Khakzad, V. Khovanskiy, P. Krieger, F. G. Oakham, R. S. Orr, J. P. Rutherfoord, Alexander Savin, M. Schram, P. B. Shatalov, L. Shaver, M. Shupe, V. Strickland, Ilia Tsukerman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Instrumentation · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtlas (anatomy)Calorimeter (particle physics)Large Hadron ColliderNuclear physicsBeamlinePhysicsCalibrationElectronPionBeam (structure)OpticsDetector

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the two ATLAS Forward Calorimeters (FCal), consisting of three modules, one behind the other, was exposed to particle beams of known energies in order to obtain the energy calibration. The data were taken in the H6 beamline at CERN in the summer of 2003, using electron and hadron beams with energies from 10 to 200 GeV. The beam test setup and collected data samples are described in detail. Using data samples taken with a minimal amount of material upstream of the calorimeter, the FCal response to electrons and pions, as measured by the linearity and resolution as a function of energy, is extracted and compared to ATLAS performance requirements.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations27
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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