MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384648355 · doi:10.1007/s41781-024-00113-4

Artificial Intelligence for the Electron Ion Collider (AI4EIC)

2024· article· en· W4384648355 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

VenueComputing and Software for Big Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle Detector Development and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of ReginaUniversity of Manitoba
FundersHigh Energy PhysicsScience and Technology Facilities CouncilOffice of ScienceU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsEPICColliderComputer scienceSystems engineeringPhysicsEngineeringNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Electron-Ion Collider (EIC), a state-of-the-art facility for studying the strong force, is expected to begin commissioning its first experiments in 2028. This is an opportune time for artificial intelligence (AI) to be included from the start at this facility and in all phases that lead up to the experiments. The second annual workshop organized by the AI4EIC working group, which recently took place, centered on exploring all current and prospective application areas of AI for the EIC. This workshop is not only beneficial for the EIC, but also provides valuable insights for the newly established ePIC collaboration at EIC. This paper summarizes the different activities and R&D projects covered across the sessions of the workshop and provides an overview of the goals, approaches and strategies regarding AI/ML in the EIC community, as well as cutting-edge techniques currently studied in other experiments.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.612

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.273 · 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