MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366548793 · doi:10.3390/physics5020033

Machine Learning Approach for Event Position Reconstruction in the DEAP-3600 Dark Matter Search Experiment

2023· article· en· W4366548793 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsSnolab
FundersRussian Science FoundationMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónScience and Technology Facilities CouncilFundacja na rzecz Nauki PolskiejLeverhulme TrustComunidad de MadridFundación Marcos Moshinsky
KeywordsEvent (particle physics)Position (finance)Artificial intelligenceMachine learningArtificial neural networkDark matterComputer scienceDetectorPhysicsPattern recognition (psychology)Particle physicsOpticsAstrophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In addition to classical analytical data processing methods, machine learning methods are widely used for data analysis in elementary particle physics. Most often, such techniques are used to identify a particular class of events (the classification problem) or to predict a certain event parameter (the regression problem). Here, we present the result of using a machine learning model to solve the regression problem of event position reconstruction in the DEAP-3600 dark matter search detector. A neural network was used as a machine learning model. Improving the position resolution will improve the reduction in background events, while increasing the signal acceptance for weakly interacting massive particles.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.232
Threshold uncertainty score0.351

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.271 · 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