MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Electrons and photons at High Level Trigger in CMS for Run II

2015· article· en· W2287551132 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle Detector Development and Performance
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Particle Physics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPortingComputer scienceLuminosityLarge Hadron ColliderSoftwareEvent (particle physics)Energy (signal processing)ColliderPhotonPhysicsReal-time computingComputer engineeringAlgorithmParticle physicsOperating systemOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The CMS experiment has been designed with a 2-level trigger system. The first level is implemented using custom-designed electronics. The second level is the so-called High Level Trigger (HLT), a streamlined version of the CMS offline reconstruction software running on a computer farm. For Run II of the Large Hadron Collider, the increase in center-of-mass energy and luminosity will raise the event rate to a level challenging for the HLT algorithms. New approaches have been studied to keep the HLT output rate manageable while maintaining thresholds low enough to cover physics analyses. The strategy mainly relies on porting online the ingredients that have been successfully applied in the offline reconstruction, thus allowing to move HLT selection closer to offline cuts. Improvements in HLT electron and photon definitions will be presented, focusing in particular on updated clustering algorithm and the energy calibration procedure, new Particle-Flow-based isolation approach and pileup mitigation techniques, and the electron-dedicated track fitting algorithm based on Gaussian Sum Filter.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.651
Threshold uncertainty score0.390

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.056
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.211 · 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