Simultaneous discovery of conservation laws and hidden particles with Smith matrix decomposition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Particle physics experiments, like the Large Hadron Collider in Geneva, can generate thousands of data points listing detected particle reactions. An important learning task is to analyze the reaction data for evidence of conserved quantities and hidden particles. This task involves latent structure in two ways: first, hypothesizing hidden quantities whose conservation determines which reactions occur, and second, hypothesizing the presence of hidden particles. We model this problem in the classic linear algebra framework of automated scientific discovery due to Valdés-Pérez, ˙Zytkow and Simon, where both reaction data and conservation laws are represented as matrices. We introduce a new criterion for selecting a matrix model for reaction data: find hidden particles and conserved quantities that rule out as many interactions among the nonhidden particles as possible. A polynomial-time algorithm for optimizing this criterion is based on the new theorem that hidden particles are required if and only if the Smith Normal Form of the reaction matrix R contains entries other than 0 or 1. To our knowledge this is the first application of Smith matrix decomposition to a problem in AI. Using data from particle accelerators, we compare our algorithm to the main model of particles in physics, known as the Standard Model: our algorithm discovers conservation laws that are equivalent to those in the Standard Model, and indicates the presence of a hidden particle (the electron antineutrino) in accordance with the Standard Model.
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 | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".