Impact of jet-production data on the next-to-next-to-leading-order determination of HERAPDF2.0 parton distributions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The HERAPDF2.0 ensemble of parton distribution functions (PDFs) was introduced in 2015. The final stage is presented, a next-to-next-to-leading-order (NNLO) analysis of the HERA data on inclusive deep inelastic ep scattering together with jet data as published by the H1 and ZEUS collaborations. A perturbative QCD fit, simultaneously of $$\alpha _s(M_Z^2)$$ α s ( M Z 2 ) and the PDFs, was performed with the result $$\alpha _s(M_Z^2)= 0.1156 \pm 0.0011~\mathrm{(exp)}~ ^{+0.0001}_{-0.0002}~ \mathrm{(model}$$ α s ( M Z 2 ) = 0.1156 ± 0.0011 ( exp ) - 0.0002 + 0.0001 ( model $$\mathrm{+ parameterisation)}~ \pm 0.0029~\mathrm{(scale)}$$ + parameterisation ) ± 0.0029 ( scale ) . The PDF sets of HERAPDF2.0Jets NNLO were determined with separate fits using two fixed values of $$\alpha _s(M_Z^2)$$ α s ( M Z 2 ) , $$\alpha _s(M_Z^2)=0.1155$$ α s ( M Z 2 ) = 0.1155 and 0.118, since the latter value was already chosen for the published HERAPDF2.0 NNLO analysis based on HERA inclusive DIS data only. The different sets of PDFs are presented, evaluated and compared. The consistency of the PDFs determined with and without the jet data demonstrates the consistency of HERA inclusive and jet-production cross-section data. The inclusion of the jet data reduced the uncertainty on the gluon PDF. Predictions based on the PDFs of HERAPDF2.0Jets NNLO give an excellent description of the jet-production data used as input.
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 | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".