Constructing the Hyper-Kamiokande Computing Model in the Build Up to Data Taking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hyper-Kamiokande is a next-generation multi-purpose neutrino experiment with a primary focus on constraining CP-violation in the lepton sector. It features a diverse science programme that includes neutrino oscillation studies, astrophysics, neutrino cross-section measurements, and searches for physics beyond the standard model, such as proton decay. Building on its predecessor, Super-Kamiokande, the Hyper-Kamiokande far detector has a total volume approximately 5 times larger and is estimated to collect nearly 2 PB of data per year. The experiment will also include both onand off-axis near detectors, including an Intermediate Water Cherenkov Detector. To manage the significant demands relating to the data from these detectors, and the associated Monte Carlo simulations for a range of physics studies, an efficient and scalable distributed computing model is essential. This model leverages Worldwide LHC Grid computing infrastructure and utilises the GridPP DIRAC instance for both workload management and for file cataloguing. In this report we forecast the computing requirements for the Hyper-K experiment, estimated to reach around 35 PB (per replica) and 8,700 CPU cores (~100,000 HS06) by 2036. We outline the resources, tools, and workflow in place to satisfy this demand.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.005 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".