MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407343812 · doi:10.3389/fdata.2025.1497622

Training and onboarding initiatives in high energy physics experiments

2025· review· en· W4407343812 on OpenAlex
Allison Reinsvold Hall, Nicole Skidmore, Gabriele Benelli, Ben Carlson, Claire David, J. E. Davies, W. Deconinck, D. M. DeMuth, P. Elmer, R. B. Garg, Stephan Hageböck, K. Lieret, Valeriia Lukashenko, S. Malik, Heidi Schellman, Graeme A Stewart, Jason Veatch, M. Hernández Villanueva

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

VenueFrontiers in Big Data · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersU.S. Department of EnergyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsOnboardingSoftwareSet (abstract data type)Key (lock)Training (meteorology)Atlas (anatomy)Computer scienceEngineeringSoftware engineeringEngineering managementPhysicsMedicinePsychologyComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article we document the current analysis software training and onboarding activities in several High Energy Physics (HEP) experiments: ATLAS, CMS, LHCb, Belle II and DUNE. Fast and efficient onboarding of new collaboration members is increasingly important for HEP experiments. With rapidly increasing data volumes and larger collaborations the analyses and consequently, the related software, become ever more complex. This necessitates structured onboarding and training. Recognizing this, a meeting series was held by the HEP Software Foundation (HSF) in 2022 for experiments to showcase their initiatives. Here we document and analyze these in an attempt to determine a set of key considerations for future HEP 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.228 · 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