MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4252733731 · doi:10.1051/epjconf/20149503030

The MoEDAL experiment - a new light on LHC physics

2015· article· en· W4252733731 on OpenAlexaff
J. L. Pinfold

Bibliographic record

VenueEPJ Web of Conferences · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLarge Hadron ColliderPhysicsPhysics beyond the Standard ModelParticle physicsNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2010 the MoEDAL experiment at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) was unanimously approved by CERN’s Research Board to start data taking in 2015. MoEDAL is a pioneering experiment designed to search for highly ionizing messengers of new physics such as magnetic monopoles or massive (pseudo-)stable charged particles. Its groundbreaking physics program defines a number of scenarios that yield potentially revolutionary insights into foundational questions. MoEDAL’s purpose is to meet such far-reaching challenges at the frontier of the field. The innovative MoEDAL detector is tuned to the prospect of discovery physics. The largely passive MoEDAL detector, deployed at Point 8 on the LHC ring, has a dual nature. First, it acts like a giant camera, comprised of nuclear track detectors - analyzed offline by ultra fast scanning microscopes – sensitive only to new physics. Second, it is uniquely able to trap the particle harbingers of new physics beyond the Standard Model for further study. MoEDAL’s radiation environment is monitored by a state-of-the-art real-time TimePix pixel detector array.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.004

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEPJ Web of ConferencesSame topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studiesFrench-language works237,207