MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Machine learning for antihydrogen detection at ALPHA

2018· article· en· W2896102594 on OpenAlexaff
A. Capra

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Molecular Physics
Canadian institutionsTRIUMF
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntihydrogenPhysicsNuclear physicsTrap (plumbing)Large Hadron ColliderAlpha (finance)AntiprotonParticle physicsAntimatterProtonPositronStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ALPHA experiment at CERN is designed to produce and trap antihydrogen to the purpose of making a precise comparison with hydrogen. The basic technique consists of driving an antihydrogen resonance which will cause the antiatom to leave the trap and annihilate. The main background to antihydrogen detection is due to cosmic rays. When an experimental cycle extends for several minutes, while the number of trapped antihydrogen remains fixed, background rejection can become challenging. Machine learning methods have been employed in ALPHA for several years, leading to a dramatic reduction of the background contamination. This allowed ALPHA to perform the first laser spectroscopy experiment on antihydrogen.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.644
Threshold uncertainty score0.483

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.233 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicAtomic and Molecular PhysicsFrench-language works237,207