Automatizing the search for mass resonances using BumpNet
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A bstract The search for resonant mass bumps in invariant-mass distributions remains a cornerstone strategy for uncovering Beyond the Standard Model (BSM) physics at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC). Traditional methods often rely on predefined functional forms and exhaustive computational and human resources, limiting the scope of tested final states and selections. This work presents BumpNet, a machine learning-based approach leveraging advanced neural network architectures to generalize and enhance the Data-Directed Paradigm (DDP) for resonance searches. Trained on a diverse dataset of smoothly-falling analytical functions and realistic simulated data, BumpNet efficiently predicts statistical significance distributions across varying histogram configurations, including those derived from LHC-like conditions. The network’s performance is validated against idealized likelihood ratio-based tests, showing minimal bias and strong sensitivity in detecting mass bumps across a range of scenarios. Additionally, BumpNet’s application to realistic BSM scenarios highlights its capability to identify subtle signals while managing the look-elsewhere effect. These results underscore BumpNet’s potential to expand the reach of resonance searches, paving the way for more comprehensive explorations of LHC data in future analyses.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".