A universal implementation of radiative effects in neutrino event generators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Due to the similarities between electron-nucleus ( eA ) and neutrino-nucleus scattering ( νA ), eA data can contribute key information to improve cross-section modeling in eA and hence in νA event generators. However, to compare data and generated events, either the data must be radiatively corrected or radiative effects need to be included in the event generators. We implemented a universal radiative corrections program that can be used with all reaction mechanisms and any eA event generator. Our program includes real photon radiation by the incident and scattered electrons, and virtual photon exchange and photon vacuum polarization diagrams. It uses the “extended peaking” approximation for electron radiation and neglects charged hadron radiation. This method, validated with GENIE, can also be extended to simulate νA radiative effects. This work facilitates data-event-generator comparisons used to improve νA event generators for the next-generation of neutrino experiments. Program Title: emMCRadCorr CPC Library link to program files: https://doi.org/10.17632/hmsxg82vnf.1 Developer's repository link: https://github.com/e4nu/emMCRadCorr Licensing provisions: AGPLv3 Programming language: C++ Nature of problem: Radiative effects can significantly modify the event kinematics and the resulting cross-sections. Such effects must be accounted for when comparing event generators to eA data. Existing radiative correction codes are tailored to specific processes and topologies, and are limited to a restricted phase space defined by the spectrometer acceptance. Therefore, a more general approach is required to apply radiative corrections to semi-inclusive and exclusive eA measurements. Solution method: Our program incorporates real photon radiation from both the incident and scattered electrons, as well as virtual photon exchange and photon vacuum polarization effects. It employs the “extended peaking” approximation for electron radiation while neglecting contributions from charged hadron radiation. The code is fully decoupled from event generator codes and can be used for all event generators in the market.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.004 |
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".