Comparing Generative Models with the New Physics Learning Machine
By: Samuele Grossi, Marco Letizia, Riccardo Torre
Potential Business Impact:
Checks if computer-made data looks real.
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.
Similar Papers
Learning to Validate Generative Models: a Goodness-of-Fit Approach
Machine Learning (Stat)
Checks if AI models for science are trustworthy.
Advanced Tutorial: Label-Efficient Two-Sample Tests
Machine Learning (CS)
Tests if two groups are different, saving money.
Discriminative versus Generative Approaches to Simulation-based Inference
High Energy Physics - Phenomenology
Helps scientists find tiny particles faster.