Fitting and Analysis Technique for Inconsistent Nuclear Data

Consistent experiment data are crucial to adjust parameters of physics models and to determine best estimates of observables. However, often experiment data are not consistent due to unrecognized systematic errors. Standard methods of statistics such as $\chi^2$-fitting cannot deal with this case. Their predictions become doubtful and associated uncertainties too small. A human has then to figure out the problem, apply corrections to the data, and repeat the fitting procedure. This takes time and potentially costs money. Therefore, a Bayesian method is introduced to fit and analyze inconsistent experiment data. It automatically detects and resolves inconsistencies. Furthermore, it allows to extract consistent subsets from the data. Finally, it provides an overall prediction with associated uncertainties and correlations less prone to the common problem of too small uncertainties. The method is foreseen to function with a large corpus of data and hence may be used in nuclear databases to deal with inconsistencies in an automated fashion.

[1]  C. G. Broyden.  The Convergence of a Class of Double-rank Minimization Algorithms 1. General Considerations , 1970 .

[2]  T. Neumann.  Probability Theory The Logic Of Science , 2016 .

[3]  J. E. Amaro,et al.  The Low energy structure of the Nucleon-Nucleon interaction: Statistical vs Systematic Uncertainties , 2014, 1410.8097.

[4]  A.J.M. Plompen,et al.  From flatness to steepness: Updating TALYS covariances with experimental information , 2014 .

[5]  M. W. Herman,et al.  Development of covariance capabilities in EMPIRE code , 2008 .

[6]  Jorge Nocedal,et al.  A Limited Memory Algorithm for Bound Constrained Optimization , 1995, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[7]  N. Vayatis,et al.  A Statistical Approach for Experimental Cross-Section Covariance Estimation Via Shrinkage , 2015 .

[8]  W. K. Hastings,et al.  Monte Carlo Sampling Methods Using Markov Chains and Their Applications , 1970 .

[9]  Nicolas Vayatis,et al.  Kriging approach for the experimental cross-section covariances estimation , 2013 .

[10]  Christopher M. Bishop,et al.  Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning (Information Science and Statistics) , 2006 .

[11]  Roberto Capote,et al.  Impact of model defect and experimental uncertainties on evaluated output , 2013 .

[12]  Thomas M. Cover,et al.  Elements of Information Theory (Wiley Series in Telecommunications and Signal Processing) , 2006 .

[13]  R. Tibshirani.  Regression Shrinkage and Selection via the Lasso , 1996 .

[14]  H. Leeb,et al.  A modified Generalized Least Squares method for large scale nuclear data evaluation , 2017 .

[15]  Roberto Capote,et al.  Nuclear data evaluation methodology including estimates of covariances , 2010 .

[16]  Georg Schnabel,et al.  Differential Cross Sections and the Impact of Model Defects in Nuclear Data Evaluation , 2016 .

[17]  Reuven Y. Rubinstein,et al.  Simulation and the Monte Carlo method , 1981, Wiley series in probability and mathematical statistics.

[18]  J. E. Amaro,et al.  Coarse-grained potential analysis of neutron-proton and proton-proton scattering below the pion production threshold , 2013, Physical Review C.

[19]  H. Haario,et al.  An adaptive Metropolis algorithm , 2001 .

[20]  D. Harville.  Matrix Algebra From a Statistician's Perspective , 1998 .