Bayesian updating for data adjustments and multi-level uncertainty propagation within Total Monte Carlo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this work, a method is proposed for combining differential and integral benchmark experimental data within a Bayesian framework for nuclear data adjustments and multi-level uncertainty propagation using the Total Monte Carlo method. First, input parameters to basic nuclear physics models implemented within the state of the art nuclear reactions code, TALYS, were sampled from uniform distributions and randomly varied to produce a large set of random nuclear data files. Next, a probabilistic data assimilation was carried out by computing the likelihood function for each random nuclear data file based first on only differential experimental data (1st update) and then on integral benchmark data (2nd update). The individual likelihood functions from the two updates were then combined into a global likelihood function which was used for the selection of the final 'best' file. The proposed method has been applied for the adjustment of $^{208}$Pb in the fast neutron energy region below 20 MeV. The 'best' file from the adjustments was compared with available experimental data from the EXFOR database as well as evaluations from the major nuclear data libraries and found to compare favourably.
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 | 0.009 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".