A continuous integration and web framework in support of the ATLAS publication process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The ATLAS collaboration defines methods, establishes procedures, and organises advisory groups to manage the publication processes of scientific papers, conference papers, and public notes. All stages are managed through web systems, computing programs, and tools that are designed and developed by the collaboration. A framework called FENCE is integrated into the CERN GitLab software repository, to automatically configure workspaces where each analysis can be documented by the analysis team and managed by the relevant coordinators. Continuous integration is used to guide the writers in applying consistent and correct formatting when preparing papers to be submitted to scientific journals. Additional software assures the correctness of other aspects of each paper, such as the lists of collaboration authors, funding agencies, and foundations. The framework and the workflow therein provide automatic and easy support to the researchers and facilitates each phase of the publication process, allowing authors to focus on the article contents. The framework and its integration with the most up to date and efficient tools has consequently provided a more professional and efficient automatized work environment to the whole collaboration.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.049 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.009 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".