MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Simplified fast detector simulation in MadAnalysis 5

2021· article· en· W3036794765 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe European Physical Journal C · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersSorbonne UniversitéDurham UniversityEuropean Commission
KeywordsDetectorLarge Hadron ColliderSet (abstract data type)Code (set theory)Core (optical fiber)ColliderKey (lock)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We introduce a new simplified fast detector simulator in the MadAnalysis 5 platform. The Python -like interpreter of the programme has been augmented by new commands allowing for a detector parametrisation through smearing and efficiency functions. On run time, an associated C++ code is automatically generated and executed to produce reconstructed-level events. In addition, we have extended the MadAnalysis 5 recasting infrastructure to support our detector emulator, and we provide predefined LHC detector configurations. We have compared predictions obtained with our approach to those resulting from the usage of the Delphes 3 software, both for Standard Model processes and a few new physics signals. Results generally agree to a level of about 10% or better, the largest differences in the predictions stemming from the different strategies that are followed to model specific detector effects. Equipped with these new functionalities, MadAnalysis 5 now offers a new user-friendly way to include detector effects when analysing collider events, the simulation of the detector and the analysis being both handled either through a set of intuitive Python commands or directly within the C++ core of the platform.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.004

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations61
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe European Physical Journal CSame topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studiesFrench-language works237,207