A Rating Quality Methodology for the Theoretical Description of Experimental Data
S.O. Omelchenko, V.M. Pugatch

TL;DR
This paper presents a new multi-parameter rating methodology for comparing theoretical models with experimental heavy-ion collision data, addressing limitations of traditional chi-squared metrics and validating it with CMS and ALICE data.
Contribution
The paper introduces a physically motivated, multi-zone rating system that improves model-data comparison and validation in heavy-ion collision analysis.
Findings
Seven-zone division is statistically validated with CMS data.
PHSD model shows near-universal performance across different particle types.
Coalescence mechanisms are essential for a consistent description of meson and baryon spectra.
Abstract
We introduce a novel multi-parameter rating methodology for comparing theoretical models with experimental data in heavy-ion collisions, addressing limitations of the global /ndf criterion. The methodology divides phase space into seven physically motivated kinematic zones. Each zone receives a quality score via logarithmic transformation of local statistics. A composite rating aggregates weighted average, geometric mean, and minimum scores with a bounded dispersion penalty. The seven-zone division is validated through boundary significance tests on CMS PbPb data at TeV: four of six physical boundaries are confirmed significant () while none of the data-driven candidates carry independent physical significance. Coefficient sensitivity: variations produce with zero rank…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsHigh-Energy Particle Collisions Research · Particle physics theoretical and experimental studies · Quantum Chromodynamics and Particle Interactions
