MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2772217608 · doi:10.1088/1674-4527/18/3/27

An algorithm to resolve <i>γ</i> -rays from charged cosmic rays with DAMPE

2018· article· en· W2772217608 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch in Astronomy and Astrophysics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicDark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Particle Physics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCosmic rayMonte Carlo methodObservatoryDark matterCharged particleUltra-high-energy cosmic rayMuonSkyScintillation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The DArk Matter Particle Explorer (DAMPE), also known as Wukong in China, which was launched on 2015 December 17, is a new high energy cosmic ray and γ -ray satellite-borne observatory. One of the main scientific goals of DAMPE is to observe GeV-TeV high energy γ -rays with accurate energy, angular and time resolution, to indirectly search for dark matter particles and for the study of high energy astrophysics. Due to the comparatively higher fluxes of charged cosmic rays with respect to γ -rays, it is challenging to identify γ -rays with sufficiently high efficiency, minimizing the amount of charged cosmic ray contamination. In this work we present a method to identify γ -rays in DAMPE data based on Monte Carlo simulations, using the powerful electromagnetic/hadronic shower discrimination provided by the calorimeter and the veto detection of charged particles provided by the plastic scintillation detector. Monte Carlo simulations show that after this selection the number of electrons and protons that contaminate the selected γ -ray events at ∼ 10GeV amounts to less than 1% of the selected sample. Finally, we use flight data to verify the effectiveness of the method by highlighting known γ -ray sources in the sky and by reconstructing preliminary light curves of the Geminga pulsar.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations21
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch in Astronomy and AstrophysicsSame topicDark Matter and Cosmic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207