ATLAS data quality operations and performance for 2015–2018 data-taking
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider reads out particle collision data from over 100 million electronic channels at a rate of approximately 100 kHz, with a recording rate for physics events of approximately 1 kHz. Before being certified for physics analysis at computer centres worldwide, the data must be scrutinised to ensure they are clean from any hardware or software related issues that may compromise their integrity. Prompt identification of these issues permits fast action to investigate, correct and potentially prevent future such problems that could render the data unusable. This is achieved through the monitoring of detector-level quantities and reconstructed collision event characteristics at key stages of the data processing chain. This paper presents the monitoring and assessment procedures in place at ATLAS during 2015–2018 data-taking. Through the continuous improvement of operational procedures, ATLAS achieved a high data quality efficiency, with 95.6% of the recorded proton-proton collision data collected at $\sqrt{s}=$13 TeV certified for physics analysis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it