AG-2026.04-1497·hep-ph·cross-listed: cs.LGhep-ex
Explainable AI for Jet Tagging: A Comparative Study of GNNExplainer, GNNShap, and GradCAM for Jet Tagging in the Lund Jet Plane
Authors
- Pahal D. Patel
- Sanmay Ganguly
Abstract
Graph neural networks such as ParticleNet and transformer based networks on point clouds such as ParticleTransformer achieve state-of-the-art performance on jet tagging benchmarks at the Large Hadron Collider, yet the physical reasoning behind their predictions remains opaque. We present different methods, i.e. perturbation-based (GNNExplainer), Shapley-value-based (GNNShap), and gradient-based (GRADCam); adapted to operate on LundNet's Lund-plane graph representation. Leveraging the fact that each node in the Lund plane corresponds to a physically meaningful parton splitting, we construct Monte Carlo truth explanation masks and introduce a physics-informed evaluation framework that goes beyond standard fidelity metrics. We perform the analysis in three transverse-momentum bins ($\mathrm{p_T} \in [500,700]$, $[800,1000]$, and the inclusive region $[500,1000]$ GeV), revealing how explanation quality and focus shift between non-perturbative and perturbative regimes. We further quantify the correlation between explainer-assigned node importance and classical jet substructure observables -- $N$-subjettiness ratios $τ_{21}$ and $τ_{32}$ and the energy correlation functions -- establishing the degree to which the model has learned known QCD features. We find that overall the weight assigned by explainability methods has a correlation with analytic observables, with expected shift across different phase space regimes, indicating that a trained neural network indeed learns some aspects of jet-substructure moments. Our open-source implementation enables reproducible explainability studies for graph-based jet taggers.
Submitted
28 April 20262 weeks ago
Version
v1
License
CC-BY-4.0
DOI
10.48550/arXiv.2604.25885
Summary
Researchers tested three methods for explaining why AI models classify jets at the Large Hadron Collider, finding that the models do learn real physics features but with different focus in high- versus low-energy regimes.
- Advanced AI models for jet classification are now somewhat interpretable: three explanation methods (perturbation, Shapley values, and gradient-based) can identify which particle interactions the model considers important.
- The explanations correlate with known physics: the model's focus on certain features aligns with classical jet-substructure measurements (N-subjettiness and energy correlations), showing it has learned genuine QCD principles rather than spurious patterns.
- Explanation quality varies by energy regime: low-energy jets show different explanation patterns than high-energy jets, revealing how models handle the non-perturbative versus perturbative regions of particle physics differently.
curious · generated by claude-haiku-4-5
Chat with this PDF
Ask questions, probe assumptions, request a plain-English summary. Answers cite sections from the preprint itself.
Community
Questions and answers about this paper from other readers. No formal peer review — just a place to think out loud.