Publishing unbinned differential cross section results
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Machine learning tools have empowered a qualitatively new way to perform differential cross section measurements whereby the data are unbinned, possibly in many dimensions. Unbinned measurements can enable, improve, or at least simplify comparisons between experiments and with theoretical predictions. Furthermore, many-dimensional measurements can be used to define observables after the measurement instead of before. There is currently no community standard for publishing unbinned data. While there are also essentially no measurements of this type public, unbinned measurements are expected in the near future given recent methodological advances. The purpose of this paper is to propose a scheme for presenting and using unbinned results, which can hopefully form the basis for a community standard to allow for integration into analysis workflows. This is foreseen to be the start of an evolving community dialogue, in order to accommodate future developments in this field that is rapidly evolving.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it