MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169365476 · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.88.015003

Experimental tests of particle flow calorimetry

2016· article· en· W2169365476 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Felix Sefkow, A. S. White, K. Kawagoe, R. Pöschl, José Repond

Bibliographic record

VenueReviews of Modern Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNuclear PhysicsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueInstitut National de Physique Nucléaire et de Physique des ParticulesScience and Technology Facilities CouncilMinisterstvo Průmyslu a ObchoduState Atomic Energy Corporation ROSATOMMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadMax-Planck-GesellschaftNorges ForskningsrådIsrael Science FoundationMinistry of Science and TechnologyFonds Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungU.S. Department of EnergyNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceMinistry of Education and Science of the Russian FederationMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyKorea Science and Engineering FoundationFonds De La Recherche Scientifique - FNRSDeutsches Elektronen-SynchrotronHelmholtz-GemeinschaftCERNDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftFermilabNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsCalorimeter (particle physics)Energy flowHadronNuclear physicsParticle (ecology)Resolution (logic)PhotonParticle physicsEnergy (signal processing)Jet (fluid)Flow (mathematics)Higgs bosonCharged particleComputational physicsDetectorMechanicsOpticsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Methods of measuring the energies of jets have relied on detection of photons, charged hadrons, and neutral hadrons in a sampling calorimeter. However, the response for each particle is different, leading to poor jet energy resolution. Improved energy resolution for future studies of Higgs bosons and new particles decaying to jets requires improved energy resolution. The particle flow algorithm recognizes that charged particle momenta are better measured than their energies, so considerable improvement in energy resolution can be made using track momenta and substituting the energy deposited in the calorimeter. This article describes beam tests of the particle flow algorithm and the confrontation of data and simulations.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.273 · 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
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

Citations80
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReviews of Modern PhysicsSame topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studiesFrench-language works237,207