MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3099809779

HistFitter software framework for statistical data analysis

2014· article· en· W3099809779 on OpenAlexaff
M. A. Baak, G. J. Besjes

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsTRIUMF
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceLarge Hadron ColliderSoftwareData analysisInterface (matter)Data miningProgramming languageParticle physicsPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a software framework for statistical data analysis, called HistFitter, that has been used exten-sively by the ATLAS Collaboration to analyze big datasets originating from proton-proton collisions at the Large Hadron Collider at CERN. Since 2012 HistFitter has been the standard statistical tool in searches for supersymmetric particles performed by ATLAS. HistFitter is a programmable and flexible framework to build, book-keep, fit, interpret and present results of data models of nearly arbitrary complexity. Starting from an object-oriented configuration, defined by users, the framework builds probability density functions that are automatically fitted to data and interpreted with statistical tests. A key innovation of HistFitter is its design, which is rooted in core analysis strategies of particle physics. The concepts of control, signal and validation regions are woven into its very fabric. These are progressively treated with statistically rigorous built-in methods. Being capable of working with multiple data models at once, HistFitter introduces an additional level of abstraction that allows for easy bookkeeping, manipulation and testing of large collections of signal hypotheses. Finally, HistFitter provides a collection of tools to present results with publication-quality style through a simple command-line interface. ar X iv

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.836
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.300 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations157
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studiesFrench-language works237,207