MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W311538206 · doi:10.1007/jhep04%282015%29079

Identifying boosted new physics with non-isolated leptons

2022· article· en· W311538206 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher Brust

Bibliographic record

VenueOSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticle physicsLeptonPhysicsSupersymmetryPhysics beyond the Standard ModelLarge Hadron ColliderStandard Model (mathematical formulation)R-parityQuarkMinimal Supersymmetric Standard ModelSubstructureEvent (particle physics)Nuclear physicsEngineeringQuantum mechanicsElectron

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Here, 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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations14
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information)Same topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studiesFrench-language works237,207