MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417268030 · doi:10.1103/g7c7-6qh2

Soft-unclustered-energy patterns from quirks

2025· article· en· W4417268030 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicHigh-Energy Particle Collisions Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of TorontoBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungCanada Research ChairsU.S. Department of EnergyHelmholtz-GemeinschaftAlfred P. Sloan FoundationDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsEvent (particle physics)String (physics)Sensitivity (control systems)Anomaly (physics)Simple (philosophy)Resonance (particle physics)Standard Model (mathematical formulation)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose searching for physics beyond the Standard Model in the low-transverse-momentum tracks accompanying hard-scatter events at the LHC. TeV-scale resonances connected to a dark QCD sector could be enhanced by selecting events with anomalies in the track distributions. As a benchmark, a quirk model with microscopic string lengths is developed, including a setup for event simulation. For this model, strategies are presented to enhance the sensitivity compared to inclusive resonance searches: a simple cut-based selection, a supervised search, and a model-agnostic weakly supervised anomaly search with the CATHODE method. Expected discovery potentials and exclusion limits are shown for <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <a:mrow> <a:mn>140</a:mn> <a:mtext> </a:mtext> <a:mtext> </a:mtext> <a:msup> <a:mi>fb</a:mi> <a:mrow> <a:mo>−</a:mo> <a:mn>1</a:mn> </a:mrow> </a:msup> </a:mrow> </a:math> of 13 TeV proton-proton collisions at the LHC.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.634
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.414 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.Same topicHigh-Energy Particle Collisions ResearchFrench-language works237,207