Parallel beam-beam simulation incorporating multiple bunches and multiple interaction regions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The simulation code COMBI has been developed to enable the study of coherent beam-beam effects in the full collision scenario of the LHC, with multiple bunches interacting at multiple crossing points over many turns. The program structure and input are conceived in a general way which allows arbitrary numbers and placements of bunches and interaction points (IP's), together with procedural options for head-on and parasitic collisions (in the strong-strong sense), beam transport, statistics gathering, harmonic analysis, and periodic output of simulation data. The scale of this problem, once we go beyond the simplest case of a pair of bunches interacting once per turn, quickly escalates into the parallel computing arena, and herein we will describe the construction of an MPI-based version of COMBI able to utilize arbitrary numbers of processors to support efficient calculation of multi-bunch multi-IP interactions and transport. Implementing the parallel version did not require extensive disruption of the basic computational routines, since all MPI functionality is isolated in a separate layer of steering routines. After an overview of the basic methods and numerical components of the code, the computational framework will be described in detail and parallel efficiency and scalability of the code will be evaluated. Initial results are shown for an example 4-IP LHC collision scheme.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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".