High energy physics : the 25th annual Montreal-Rochester-Syracuse-Toronto conference on high energy physics, MRST 2003: a tribute to Joe Schechter, Syracuse, New York 13-15 May 2003
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are four fundamental forces in nature: gravitational, electromagnetic, weak, and strong forces. The last two are sometimes referred to as nuclear forces. It is the main objective of high energy physics to explore these forces, and hopefully unify them into one fundamental theory. This goal has made high energy physics one of the most ambitious, attractive, challenging, and powerful areas of physics, and has attracted experts from other areas including pure and applied mathematics, and computer science. The MRST annual conference brings together senior and junor investigators and provides a friendly and stimulating atmosphere to discuss recent developments in high energy physics. A broad range of topics in high energy physics was covered in this conference, and therefore these proceedings will be very useful to both senior researchers as well as graduate students in high energy physics, nuclear physics, and computational physics, providing most recent ideas, techniques, and directions for future research in this field.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it