Abstract

Autoencoders are widely used in machine learning applications, in particular for anomaly detection. Hence, they have been introduced in high energy physics as a promising tool for model-independent new physics searches. We scrutinize the usage of autoencoders for unsupervised anomaly detection based on reconstruction loss to show their capabilities, but also their limitations. As a particle physics benchmark scenario, we study the tagging of top jet images in a background of QCD jet images. Although we reproduce the positive results from the literature, we show that the standard autoencoder setup cannot be considered as a model-independent anomaly tagger by inverting the task: due to the sparsity and the specific structure of the jet images, the autoencoder fails to tag QCD jets if it is trained on top jets even in a semi-supervised setup. Since the same autoencoder architecture can be a good tagger for a specific example of an anomaly and a bad tagger for a different example, we suggest improved performance measures for the task of model-independent anomaly detection. We also improve the capability of the autoencoder to learn non-trivial features of the jet images, such that it is able to achieve both top jet tagging and the inverse task of QCD jet tagging with the same setup. However, we want to stress that a truly model-independent and powerful autoencoder-based unsupervised jet tagger still needs to be developed.

Highlights

  • Identifying so-called reducible backgrounds, which share some but not all features of the signal events, amounts to a straightforward classification task, where one can try to either employ supervised or unsupervised machine learning techniques to separate the two classes

  • As a particle physics benchmark scenario, we study the tagging of top jet images in a background of QCD jet images

  • We reproduce the positive results from the literature, we show that the standard autoencoder setup cannot be considered as a model-independent anomaly tagger by inverting the task: due to the sparsity and the specific structure of the jet images, the autoencoder fails to tag QCD jets if it is trained on top jets even in a semi-supervised setup

Read more

Summary

Autoencoder limitations

We introduce our AE architecture and investigate its training and performance. We either train the AE on a pure sample of QCD jets and call it a direct tagger, or we train the AE on a pure sample of top jets and call it an inverse tagger While the former setup is designed to perform the well-known task of tagging top jets as anomalies, the latter setup is designed to perform the inverse task, i.e. tagging QCD jets as anomalies in a background sample of top jets. We are able to explain the success of the direct tagger and the failure of the inverse tagger by the interplay between an insufficient AE performance and the different complexity in the images of the two jet classes

Jet data and autoencoder architecture
Complexity bias
Tagging performance
Improving the autoencoder performance
Intensity remapping
Kernel MSE
Autoencoder performance
Conclusion
A Jet simulation and neural network architecture
B Intensity distributions after remapping
Findings
C Further results
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call