5 ms·

> Nearly a decade after that last analysis, the collaboration has finally come up for air. In a November 2020 meeting over Zoom, Kotwal decrypted the team’s res

> Nearly a decade after that last analysis, the collaboration has finally come up for air. In a November 2020 meeting over Zoom, Kotwal decrypted the team’s result (they had worked with encrypted data so that the numbers wouldn’t influence their analysis) with the press of a button. What does it mean that they worked with encrypted data?

joe-collins 5y ago
They used homomorphic encryption to blind themselves. Utilized correctly, it would have no impact on the result, only on the team's knowledge of the substance of the data. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homomorphic_encryption https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homomorphic_encryption
- IncRnd 5y ago
  That's completely incorrect according to the actual study. [1] They used random data blinding until analysis procedures were established. The word encrypted was used informally (in the article) not as a reference to homomorphism. [1] https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abk1781 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abk1781
kraemahz 5y ago
I've seen other instances where physicists working at CERN would blind themselves to the results of their computations while developing their algorithms, making sure the code was bug-free and physically accurate without running it "in production" as it were on the actual experimental results. This is to blind themselves to the actual statistics of the experiment so that "p-hacking" or manipulation of the results to fit a preconceived agenda is not a temptation.
Mathnerd314 5y ago
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abk1781 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abk1781 says "The MW fit values are blinded during analysis with an unknown additive offset in the range of −50 to 50 MeV". So they added a random number so they didn't game the analysis to be near the known value. It's nothing as complicated as homomorphic encryption.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

joe-collins 5y ago

They used homomorphic encryption to blind themselves. Utilized correctly, it would have no impact on the result, only on the team's knowledge of the substance of the data. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homomorphic_encryption https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homomorphic_encryption

IncRnd 5y ago
That's completely incorrect according to the actual study. [1] They used random data blinding until analysis procedures were established. The word encrypted was used informally (in the article) not as a reference to homomorphism. [1] https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abk1781 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abk1781

kraemahz 5y ago

I've seen other instances where physicists working at CERN would blind themselves to the results of their computations while developing their algorithms, making sure the code was bug-free and physically accurate without running it "in production" as it were on the actual experimental results. This is to blind themselves to the actual statistics of the experiment so that "p-hacking" or manipulation of the results to fit a preconceived agenda is not a temptation.

Mathnerd314 5y ago

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abk1781 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abk1781 says "The MW fit values are blinded during analysis with an unknown additive offset in the range of −50 to 50 MeV". So they added a random number so they didn't game the analysis to be near the known value. It's nothing as complicated as homomorphic encryption.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]