Machine Learning

AG-2025.11-1255

stat.ML

Learning to Validate Generative Models: a Goodness-of-Fit Approach

Pietro Cappelli, Gaia Grosso, Marco Letizia, Humberto Reyes-González, Marco Zanetti

Generative models are increasingly central to scientific workflows, yet their systematic use and interpretation require a proper understanding of their limitations through rigorous validation. Classic approaches struggle with scalability, statistical power, or interpretability when applied to high-dimensional data, making it difficult to certify the reliability of these models in realistic, high-dimensional scientific settings. Here, we propose the use of the New Physics Learning Machine (NPLM), a learning-based approach to goodness-of-fit testing inspired by the Neyman--Pearson construction, to test generative networks trained on high-dimensional scientific data. We demonstrate the performance of NPLM for validation in two benchmark cases: generative models trained on mixtures of Gaussian models with increasing dimensionality, and a public end-to-end model, known as FlowSim, developed to generate high-energy physics collision events. We demonstrate that the NPLM can serve as a powerful validation method while also providing a means to diagnose sub-optimally modeled regions of the data.

AG-2025.08-1068

stat.ML

Comparing Generative Models with the New Physics Learning Machine

Samuele Grossi, Marco Letizia, Riccardo Torre

The rise of generative models for scientific research calls for the development of new methods to evaluate their fidelity. A natural framework for addressing this problem is two-sample hypothesis testing, namely the task of determining whether two data sets are drawn from the same distribution. In large-scale and high-dimensional regimes, machine learning offers a set of tools to push beyond the limitations of standard statistical techniques. In this work, we put this claim to the test by comparing a recent proposal from the high-energy physics literature, the New Physics Learning Machine, to perform a classification-based two-sample test against a number of alternative approaches, following the framework presented in Grossi et al. (2025). We highlight the efficiency tradeoffs of the method and the computational costs that come from adopting learning-based approaches. Finally, we discuss the advantages of the different methods for different use cases.

AG-2025.06-087

stat.ML

Multilevel neural simulation-based inference

Yuga Hikida, Ayush Bharti, Niall Jeffrey, François-Xavier Briol

Neural simulation-based inference (SBI) is a popular set of methods for Bayesian inference when models are only available in the form of a simulator. These methods are widely used in the sciences and engineering, where writing down a likelihood can be significantly more challenging than constructing a simulator. However, the performance of neural SBI can suffer when simulators are computationally expensive, thereby limiting the number of simulations that can be performed. In this paper, we propose a novel approach to neural SBI which leverages multilevel Monte Carlo techniques for settings where several simulators of varying cost and fidelity are available. We demonstrate through both theoretical analysis and extensive experiments that our method can significantly enhance the accuracy of SBI methods given a fixed computational budget.

AG-2025.05-1598

stat.ML

Lorentz Local Canonicalization: How to Make Any Network Lorentz-Equivariant

Jonas Spinner, Luigi Favaro, Peter Lippmann, Sebastian Pitz, Gerrit Gerhartz, Tilman Plehn, Fred A. Hamprecht

Lorentz-equivariant neural networks are becoming the leading architectures for high-energy physics. Current implementations rely on specialized layers, limiting architectural choices. We introduce Lorentz Local Canonicalization (LLoCa), a general framework that renders any backbone network exactly Lorentz-equivariant. Using equivariantly predicted local reference frames, we construct LLoCa-transformers and graph networks. We adapt a recent approach for geometric message passing to the non-compact Lorentz group, allowing propagation of space-time tensorial features. Data augmentation emerges from LLoCa as a special choice of reference frame. Our models achieve competitive and state-of-the-art accuracy on relevant particle physics tasks, while being $4\times$ faster and using $10\times$ fewer FLOPs.

AG-2024.09-1291

stat.ML

Refereeing the Referees: Evaluating Two-Sample Tests for Validating Generators in Precision Sciences

Samuele Grossi, Marco Letizia, Riccardo Torre

We propose a robust methodology to evaluate the performance and computational efficiency of non-parametric two-sample tests, specifically designed for high-dimensional generative models in scientific applications such as in particle physics. The study focuses on tests built from univariate integral probability measures: the sliced Wasserstein distance and the mean of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistics, already discussed in the literature, and the novel sliced Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistic. These metrics can be evaluated in parallel, allowing for fast and reliable estimates of their distribution under the null hypothesis. We also compare these metrics with the recently proposed unbiased Fréchet Gaussian Distance and the unbiased quadratic Maximum Mean Discrepancy, computed with a quartic polynomial kernel. We evaluate the proposed tests on various distributions, focusing on their sensitivity to deformations parameterized by a single parameter $ε$. Our experiments include correlated Gaussians and mixtures of Gaussians in 5, 20, and 100 dimensions, and a particle physics dataset of gluon jets from the JetNet dataset, considering both jet- and particle-level features. Our results demonstrate that one-dimensional-based tests provide a level of sensitivity comparable to other multivariate metrics, but with significantly lower computational cost, making them ideal for evaluating generative models in high-dimensional settings. This methodology offers an efficient, standardized tool for model comparison and can serve as a benchmark for more advanced tests, including machine-learning-based approaches.

AG-2024.07-1577

stat.ML

Everything that can be learned about a causal structure with latent variables by observational and interventional probing schemes

Marina Maciel Ansanelli, Elie Wolfe, Robert W. Spekkens

What types of differences among causal structures with latent variables are impossible to distinguish by statistical data obtained by probing each visible variable? If the probing scheme is simply passive observation, then it is well-known that many different causal structures can realize the same joint probability distributions. Even for the simplest case of two visible variables, for instance, one cannot distinguish between one variable being a causal parent of the other and the two variables sharing a latent common cause. However, it is possible to distinguish between these two causal structures if we have recourse to more powerful probing schemes, such as the possibility of intervening on one of the variables and observing the other. Herein, we address the question of which causal structures remain indistinguishable even given the most informative types of probing schemes on the visible variables. We find that two causal structures remain indistinguishable if and only if they are both associated with the same mDAG structure (as defined by Evans (2016)). We also consider the question of when one causal structure dominates another in the sense that it can realize all of the joint probability distributions that can be realized by the other using a given probing scheme. (Equivalence of causal structures is the special case of mutual dominance.) Finally, we investigate to what extent one can weaken the probing schemes implemented on the visible variables and still have the same discrimination power as a maximally informative probing scheme.

AG-2024.04-356

stat.ML

Bayesian evidence estimation from posterior samples with normalizing flows

Rahul Srinivasan, Marco Crisostomi, Roberto Trotta, Enrico Barausse, Matteo Breschi

We propose a novel method ($floZ$), based on normalizing flows, to estimate the Bayesian evidence (and its numerical uncertainty) from a pre-existing set of samples drawn from the unnormalized posterior distribution. We validate it on distributions whose evidence is known analytically, up to 15 parameter space dimensions, and compare with two state-of-the-art techniques for estimating the evidence: nested sampling (which computes the evidence as its main target) and a $k$-nearest-neighbors technique that produces evidence estimates from posterior samples. Provided representative samples from the target posterior are available, our method is more robust to posterior distributions with sharp features, especially in higher dimensions. For a simple multivariate Gaussian, we demonstrate its accuracy for up to 200 dimensions with $10^5$ posterior samples. $floZ$ has wide applicability, e.g., to estimate evidence from variational inference, Markov Chain Monte Carlo samples, or any other method that delivers samples and their likelihood from the unnormalized posterior density. As a physical application, we use $floZ$ to compute the Bayes factor for the presence of the first overtone in the ringdown signal of the gravitational wave data of GW150914, finding good agreement with nested sampling.