MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3104026977 · doi:10.1007/jhep04(2015)079

Identifying boosted new physics with non-isolated leptons

2015· article· en· W3104026977 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueIndustry CanadaUniversity of MarylandHenry Luce FoundationJohn Templeton FoundationMinistero dello Sviluppo EconomicoU.S. Department of EnergyGovernment of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsLeptonSupersymmetryPhysics beyond the Standard ModelStandard Model (mathematical formulation)Lepton numberSubstructure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We demonstrate the utility of leptons which fail standard isolation criteria in searches for new physics at the LHC. Such leptons can arise in any event containing a highly boosted particle which decays to both leptons and quarks. We begin by considering multiple extensions to the Standard Model which primarily lead to events with non-isolated leptons and are therefore missed by current search strategies. We emphasize the failure of standard isolation variables to adequately discriminate between signal and SM background for any value of the isolation cuts. We then introduce a new approach which makes use of jet substructure techniques to distinguish a broad range of signals from QCD events. We proceed with a simulated, proof-of-principle search for R-parity violating supersymmetry to demonstrate both the experimental reach possible with the use of non-isolated leptons and the utility of new substructure variables over existing techniques.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations23
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy Physics→Same topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies→French-language works237,207→