MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Fast shower simulation in the ATLAS calorimeter

2008· article· en· W2047650664 on OpenAlexaff
E. L. Barberio, J. Boudreau, B. Butler, S. L. Cheung, A. Dell’Acqua, Andrea De Simone, W. Ehrenfeld, M. V. Gallas, A. Glazov, З. Маршалл, J. Mueller, R. Plačakytė, A. Rimoldi, P. Savard, V. Tsulaia, A. T. Waugh, C. C. Young

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShowerPhysicsAtlas (anatomy)DetectorCalorimeter (particle physics)Nuclear physicsLarge Hadron ColliderBarrel (horology)ElectronParticle physicsOpticsEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The time to simulate pp collisions in the ATLAS detector is largely dominated by the showering of electromagnetic particles in the heavy parts of the detector, especially the electromagnetic barrel and endcap calorimeters. Two procedures have been developed to accelerate the processing time of electromagnetic particles in these regions: (1) a fast shower parameterisation and (2) a frozen shower library. Both work by generating the response of the calorimeter to electrons and positrons with Geant 4, and then reintroduce the response into the simulation at runtime. In the fast shower parameterisation technique, a parameterisation is tuned to single electrons and used later by simulation. In the frozen shower technique, actual showers from low-energy particles are used in the simulation. Full Geant 4 simulation is used to develop showers down to ∼ 1GeV, at which point the shower is terminated by substituting a frozen shower. Judicious use of both techniques over the entire electromagnetic portion of the ATLAS calorimeter produces an important improvement of CPU time. We discuss the algorithms and their performance in this paper.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.245 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations9
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studiesFrench-language works237,207