Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC · HackerPapers discussions

Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC — mentioned by blueplanet200

Mon, 19 Oct 2026 17:39:45 GMT

Using neural nets for signal background separation was pretty standard in ~2012 when the Higgs discovery was published. Was also pretty standard for CDF + DZero papers that came out before the LHC turned on. https://arxiv.org/abs/1207.7214 - The original ATLAS Higgs discovery paper uses neural nets to identify photons. It also uses a neural net b-tagger to improve the H->WW signal to noise ratio. https://arxiv.org/abs/1303.0763 - used neural nets extra tt+jets noise https://arxiv.org/abs/1503.05066 - used neural nets for signal/background separation.

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC — mentioned by justinnk

Sat, 26 Sep 2026 21:39:17 GMT

This one [0] about the Higgs boson is hard to beat. Pages 25-32 are just full of around 5150 „authors“, pages 33-37 are their affilliations. [0] https://arxiv.org/abs/1207.7214

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC — mentioned by godelski

Wed, 11 Mar 2026 22:52:10 GMT

> physics tends to be much more reproducible than biology, and CS doubly-so. With physics I think there is a better culture of reproduction, but that is, I believe, due more to culture. That it is acceptable to "be slow". There's a high stress on being methodical and extremely precise. The prestige is built on making your work bulletproof, and so you're really encouraged to help others reproduce your work as it strengthens it. You're also encouraged to analyze in detail and to faithfully reproduce, because finding cracks also yields prestige. I don't know if it's the money, but no one is in…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC — mentioned by t_mann

Wed, 09 Oct 2024 10:56:45 GMT

Here's 8 densely printed pages of contributors to a discovery that lead to a Nobel prize: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1207.7214#page=26 Guess how many of them were included in the prize. It's a shame that the Nobel committee shies away from awarding it to institutions, but the AlphaFold prize doesn't even make the top 10 in a list of most controversial omissions from a Nobel prize. It's a simple case of lab director gets the most credit.

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC — mentioned by godelski

Sun, 30 Jul 2023 19:54:03 GMT

The LHC has multiple teams that will replicate an experiment. The facility is so big that you have different groups. You also have different detectors (such as ATLAS and CMS) where you replicate the experiments because each one has a bit of difference. And except for the very high energy stuff, other labs around the world can reproduce the results. Not to mention that particle physics has a 5 sigma significance threshold... But for a lot of this, what happens is that they make the claim, they contact peers, send out the data, and have their peers confirm. You ever wonder why experiments like…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC — mentioned by losvedir

Mon, 11 Jan 2021 20:28:24 GMT

That's a good question. You're right that a random grad student in a lab can't replicate, e.g., the discovery of the Higgs boson! However, at least for the Higgs (and I believe this is standard for most such large experiments), there were actually two different groups using two different apparatuses, both at CERN. There was the CMS[0] detector and ATLAS[1] detector, used and analyzed by two different groups of physicists, resulting in two papers[2,3], published on the same day. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_Muon_Solenoid [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATLAS_experiment [2]…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC — mentioned by particleguy

Fri, 20 Dec 2019 21:21:52 GMT

>> ArXiv pre-prints are pretty normal in physics and math. Correct, and they are usually followed up by a published, peer-reviewed paper as well. I look forward to the day this one also gets reviewed and published. Higgs boson discovery pre-print: https://arxiv.org/abs/1207.7214 Higgs boson discovery paper: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037026931... It's essentially the same text. >> BTW, Krasznahorkay is a highly-cited researchers. Great

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC — mentioned by jsprogrammer

Mon, 31 Aug 2015 18:10:16 GMT

Here is one paper: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1207.7214v2.pdf Look at Figures 8 and 9. They show the p-value (at whatever level of data was collected when the paper was written) over the parameter space that is being searched. You can see that the values observed have a clear separation -- most are close to 1 (null-hypothesis holds) with just one significant dip towards 0 (null-hypothesis doesn't hold). If you were to animate this graph with the p-values over time (as more observations are made), you would see the trend towards 0 or 1 much clearer. The Boson experimenters would expect a (1 - p)…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC — mentioned by cygx

Sat, 04 Aug 2012 08:20:47 GMT

Better link to the arXiv abstract, ie http://arxiv.org/abs/1207.7214 You also did not link the accompanying paper from CMS http://arxiv.org/abs/1207.7235

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC — HN submission

Sat, 04 Aug 2012 00:37:47 GMT

Observation of a new particle in the search for the Higgs boson

29 points; 10 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC — mentioned by ww520

Sat, 04 Aug 2012 00:20:31 GMT

Link to the actual paper (pdf). http://arxiv.org/pdf/1207.7214v1.pdf

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.