MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396662154 · doi:10.1051/epjconf/202429504016

Constructing the Hyper-Kamiokande Computing Model in the Build Up to Data Taking

2024· article· en· W4396662154 on OpenAlexfundno aff
S. King

Bibliographic record

VenueEPJ Web of Conferences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAlliance de recherche numérique du CanadaEuropean CommissionInstitute for Cosmic Ray Research, University of TokyoInstitut National de Physique Nucléaire et de Physique des ParticulesImperial College LondonUK Research and Innovation
KeywordsSuper-KamiokandeComputer scienceData sciencePhysicsParticle physicsNeutrino

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.764
Threshold uncertainty score0.198

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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