MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410401006 · doi:10.1103/physrevc.111.054913

Bayesian inference analysis of jet quenching using inclusive jet and hadron suppression measurements

2025· article· en· W4410401006 on OpenAlexafffund
R. J. Ehlers, Y. Chen, James Declan Mulligan, Yi Ji, Arun Kumar, Simon Mak, P. M. Jacobs, Abhijit Majumder, A. Angerami, R. Arora, Steffen A. Bass, Rashmi Datta, Lipei Du, Hannah Elfner, R. J. Fries, Charles Gale, Yayun He, B. V. Jacak, Sangyong Jeon, F. Jonas, L. Kasper, M. Kordell, R. Kunnawalkam Elayavalli, Joseph Latessa, Y.-J. Lee, R. Lemmon, Matthew Luzum, Andi Mankolli, C. De Martín, H. Mehryar, T. Mengel, C. Nattrass, J. Norman, Charles Thomas Parker, Jean-François Paquet, J. H. Putschke, Hendrik Roch, G. Roland, B. Schenke, L. Schwiebert, A. Sengupta, Chun Shen, Mayank Singh, C. Sirimanna, D. Soeder, R. A. Soltz, Ismail Soudi, Y. Tachibana, J. Velkovska, G. Vujanovic, X.-N. Wang, X. Wu, W. Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. C · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicHigh-Energy Particle Collisions Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Regina
FundersEuropean Research CouncilNuclear PhysicsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOffice of the Vice President for Research, Wayne State UniversityOffice of ScienceAcademy of FinlandNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaCanada Research ChairsU.S. Department of EnergySan Diego Supercomputer CenterFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São PauloUniversity of ReginaNational Energy Research Scientific Computing CenterUniversity of Texas at AustinWayne State UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsHadronJet quenchingParticle physicsJet (fluid)InferenceBayesian probabilityNuclear physicsPhysicsBayesian inferenceQuenching (fluorescence)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceMechanicsQuark–gluon plasmaOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Collaboration reports a new determination of the jet transport parameter <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <a:mover accent="true"> <a:mi>q</a:mi> <a:mo>̂</a:mo> </a:mover> </a:math> in the quark-gluon plasma (QGP) using Bayesian inference, incorporating all available inclusive hadron and jet yield suppression data measured in heavy-ion collisions at the BNL Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) and the CERN Large Hadron Collider (LHC). This multi-observable analysis extends the previously published Bayesian inference determination of <c:math xmlns:c="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <c:mover accent="true"> <c:mi>q</c:mi> <c:mo>̂</c:mo> </c:mover> </c:math> , which was based solely on a selection of inclusive hadron suppression data. is a modular framework incorporating detailed dynamical models of QGP formation and evolution, and jet propagation and interaction in the QGP. Virtuality-dependent partonic energy loss in the QGP is modeled as a thermalized weakly coupled plasma, with parameters determined from Bayesian calibration using soft-sector observables. This Bayesian calibration of <e:math xmlns:e="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <e:mover accent="true"> <e:mi>q</e:mi> <e:mo>̂</e:mo> </e:mover> </e:math> utilizes active learning, a machine-learning approach, for efficient exploitation of computing resources. The experimental data included in this analysis span a broad range in collision energy and centrality, and in transverse momentum. In order to explore the systematic dependence of the extracted parameter posterior distributions, several different calibrations are reported, based on combined jet and hadron data; on jet or hadron data separately; and on restricted kinematic or centrality ranges of the jet and hadron data. Tension is observed in comparison of these variations, providing new insights into the physics of jet transport in the QGP and its theoretical formulation.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.879
Threshold uncertainty score0.482

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.387 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations15
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. CSame topicHigh-Energy Particle Collisions ResearchFrench-language works237,207