MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2975635548 · doi:10.22323/1.352.0017

Impact of LHC top-quark pair measurements to CTEQ-TEA PDF analysis

2019· article· en· W2975635548 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Tie-Jiun Hou, Orkash Amat, M. Czakon, Sayipjamal Dulat, J. Huston, Alexander Mitov, Andrew S. Papanastasiou, Carl Schmidt, Ibrahim Sitiwaldi, Keping Xie, Zhite Yu, C.–P. Yuan

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of XXVII International Workshop on Deep-Inelastic Scattering and Related Subjects — PoS(DIS2019) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of GeneticsMedical Research CouncilDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftScience and Technology Facilities CouncilEuropean CommissionUniversity of EdinburghPrinceton UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsParticle physicsPhysicsLarge Hadron ColliderTop quarkContext (archaeology)Sensitivity (control systems)Bar (unit)Nuclear physicsGluonQuarkEngineeringMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Detailed studies have been carried out on the impact of the LHC top quark pair production data on gluon PDF, in the context of the CTEQ-TEA global PDF fit, with the ePump-updating method. The considered $t\bar{t}$ data include single differential distributions from ATLAS and double differential distributions from CMS, both at 8 TeV. All analyses have been carried out at the NNLO, using fastNNLO tables. We show that the sensitivity per data point of the LHC $t\bar{t}$ data is similar to that of jet data, as included in the CT14HERA2 fit, while the total sensitivity of the present $t\bar{t}$ data is not as large as the jet data because of the much smaller number of $t\bar{t}$ data points in the presently available data.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of XXVII International Workshop on Deep-Inelastic Scattering and Related Subjects — PoS(DIS2019)→Same topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies→French-language works237,207→