Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2609.35830

Translating LHCb's Documentation: First experiences and ensuring maintenance

Andy Morris·Zhijie Wang·Xuhao Yuan·Yisheng Fu·George Hallett·Jingqi He·Kai Liu·Jiayu Zhao·Xiaokang Zhou
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The Starterkit Lessons online and Starterkit Workshops held in Geneva each year have been the main method of onboarding newcomers to the LHCb experiment since its founding in 2015. The new software corresponding to Upgrade 1 of the LHCb and Run 3 of datataking at the LHC has necessitated a new version of this Starterkit to be written. This new version has made several improvements over the old one, with increased maintainability through testing of examples in CI pipelines, and has also allowed for translations of the Starterkit Lessons. In late 2025 the Run 3 Starterkit lessons were translated into Mandarin Chinese, to allow for a sibling Starterkit event to take place in China, with a dedicated liaison role set up to ensure synchronization between the two translations. To measure the success of the Chinese Starterkit Lessons, analytics have been added revealing that roughly 22% of all visits to the Starterkit website will access at least one Chinese-language page.

Explore related subjects

physics.ed-phhep-ex

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Andy Morris, Zhijie Wang, Xuhao Yuan, Yisheng Fu, George Hallett, Jingqi He, Kai Liu, Jiayu Zhao, Xiaokang Zhou. 2026-09-23. Translating LHCb's Documentation: First experiences and ensuring maintenance. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.35830

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Active Learning with Generative AI in Introductory Physics: A Multi-Institutional Study of the P-A.I.R. Framework

Generative AI tools have become part of how students study physics, yet unstructured use may reduce students' opportunities to work through problems independently. The Physics AI-Replication (P-A.I.R.) framework structures AI use as a four-step cycle: students identify a challenging problem, obtain an AI-generated explanation and solution, request similar practice problems, and solve them independently before reviewing the AI's solutions. We evaluated P-A.I.R. in 11 algebra- and calculus-based introductory physics sections at four U.S. institutions using a common end-of-semester survey. Most students reported improved conceptual understanding (90.9\%) and found the replicated practice problems helpful (97.7\%), and these two ratings were strongly associated ($r_s = 0.58$). Perceptions of both components, as well as post-engagement confidence ($μ= 7.18$ on a 1-10 scale), were consistent across institutions. Post-engagement confidence was associated with perceived improvement in conceptual understanding ($r_s = 0.37$) and the helpfulness of replicated practice ($r_s = 0.35$), but not with how often students used AI ($r_s = 0.02$) or with self-reported GPA ($r_s = 0.13$). Thematic analysis of open-ended responses showed that students valued AI primarily for conceptual clarification and structured problem solving (63.0\%), while their main concerns were AI accuracy (34.2\%) and the need for explanations that guide rather than simply provide answers (29.7\%). These findings suggest that how students engage with AI matters more than how often they use it, and that frameworks sequencing AI assistance with independent problem solving offer a practical, transferable approach for physics instruction.

physics.ed-ph↗
arXiv2026

Balancing broomsticks to a t!

A classic question from rotational mechanics asks, "Is it easier to balance a broomstick heavy side up or heavy side down?" Measuring the time a student can balance an asymmetrically weighted meter stick in two orientations is a straightforward exercise that can be used to introduce or review the t' framework, which guides lab students in comparisons of results and iterative improvement of their measurements. As a two-year college physics program, many of our students attend from other institutions, so while t' is taught in the introductory mechanics labs, there is no guarantee that a student in a following lab course will be familiar with the material. To address this, the t' concepts are reviewed in the first session of subsequent lab courses. The broomstick experiment is a quick and fun implementation.

physics.ed-ph↗
arXiv2026

Getting the picture - Subtractive color mixing with an inkjet printer

When teaching colors, physics teachers ask their students to ignore what is taught in art classes and embrace a primary color system of red, green, and blue. This scheme is additive and all colors can be generated by combining light of these three colors with varying intensities. There have been a number of demonstrations and tools to help students understand additive color mixing, using LEDs, color monitors, or similar technologies. However, the subtractive primaries of cyan, magenta, and yellow have received far less attention, if students have previous knowledge it is from printer ink cartridges. This gap may exist because as pigments it can be harder to vary their intensities in real time. Fortunately, our colleagues in the art department are well-versed in subtractive color mixing, and have taught this topic for many years through the lens of color printing. We steal a page from their book and describe how to create a color image using cyan, magenta, yellow, and black layers (CMYK). Black is used as an additional layer due to mixing issues concerning the imperfections of the CMY pigments. With imaging software, an inkjet printer, and some transparencies, physics instructors are just a few keystrokes away from being able to demonstrate subtractive color mixing.

physics.ed-ph↗