MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285077237 · doi:10.21468/scipostphys.14.1.009

Signal region combination with full and simplified likelihoods in MadAnalysis 5

2023· article· en· W4285077237 on OpenAlexaff
Jack Y. Araz, Benjamin Fuks, Sabine Kraml

Bibliographic record

VenueSciPost Physics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Particle Physics
FundersInstitut National de Physique Nucléaire et de Physique des ParticulesScience and Technology Facilities CouncilAgence Nationale de la RechercheUniversité Grenoble Alpes
KeywordsJSONComputer scienceSIGNAL (programming language)Disjoint setsR packageData miningCovarianceDatabaseStatisticsMathematicsComputational scienceProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The statistical combination of disjoint signal regions in reinterpretation studies uses more of the data of an analysis and gives more robust results than the single signal region approach. We present the implementation and usage of signal region combination in MadAnalysis 5 through two methods: an interface to the Pyhf package making use of statistical models in JSON-serialised format provided by the ATLAS collaboration, and a simplified likelihood calculation making use of covariance matrices provided by the CMS collaboration. The gain in physics reach is demonstrated 1.) by comparison with official mass limits for 4 ATLAS and 5 CMS analyses from the Public Analysis Database of MadAnalysis 5 for which signal region combination is currently available, and 2.) by a case study for an MSSM scenario in which both stops and sbottoms can be produced and have a variety of decays into charginos and neutralinos.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.124

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0370.010

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations15
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSciPost PhysicsSame topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studiesFrench-language works237,207