cs.LGMay 8, 2026

Uncovering Hidden Systematics in Neural Network Models for High Energy Physics

Authors: Lucie FlekPhilipp Alexander JungsAkbar KarimiTimo SaalaAlexander SchmidMatthias SchottPhilipp SoldinChristopher Wiebusch+1 more

Organizations: Bonn-Aachen Institute of Technology, University of Bonn, Germany · Physics Institute III A, RWTH Aachen University, Germany · Institute of Physics, University of Bonn, Germany · Physics Institute III B, RWTH Aachen University, Germany

Abstract

Neural networks (NNs) are inherently multidimensional classifiers that learn complex, non-linear relationships among input observables. While their flexibility enables unprecedented performance in high-energy physics (HEP) analyses, it also makes them sensitive to small variations in their inputs. Consequently, the propagation and estimation of systematic uncertainties in NN-based models remain an open challenge. There are indications that uncertainties derived in control regions or from nominal variations of input features can underestimate the true model uncertainty, potentially leaving biases unaccounted for. Inspired by insights from adversarial-attack studies in machine learning, we explore how subtle perturbations, fully consistent with the experimental uncertainties on the input observables, can lead to substantial changes in NN outputs, while keeping the one-dimensional and correlated input distributions nearly unchanged. Using a set of representative HEP tasks, including event classification and object identification, and testing across a variety of network architectures, we demonstrate that networks can be systematically "fooled" at significant rates within the allowed uncertainty envelopes. Building on this observation, we introduce a quantitative framework to probe and measure the hidden sensitivity of neural networks to realistic experimental variations, providing a practical path to evaluate and control their systematic uncertainty in physics analyses.

Explore similar work

Dec 30, 2025hep-ph

Quantitative Understanding of PDF Fits and their Uncertainties

Parton Distribution Functions (PDFs) play a central role in describing experimental data at colliders and provide insight into the structure of nucleons. As the LHC enters an era of high-precision measurements, a robust PDF determination with a reliable uncertainty quantification has become mandatory in order to match the experimental precision. The NNPDF collaboration has pioneered the use of Machine Learning (ML) techniques for PDF determinations, using Neural Networks (NNs) to parametrise the unknown PDFs in a flexible and unbiased way. The NNs are then trained on experimental data by means of stochastic gradient descent algorithms. The statistical robustness of the results is validated by extensive closure tests using synthetic data. In this work, we develop a theoretical framework based on the Neural Tangent Kernel (NTK) to analyse the training dynamics of neural networks. This approach allows us to derive, under precise assumptions, an analytical description of the neural network evolution during training, enabling a quantitative understanding of the training process. Having an analytical handle on the training dynamics allows us to clarify the role of the NN architecture and the impact of the experimental data in a transparent way. Similarly, we are able to describe the evolution of the covariance of the NN output during training, providing a quantitative description of how uncertainties are propagated from the data to the fitted function. While our results are not a substitute for PDF fitting, they do provide a powerful diagnostic tool to assess the robustness of current fitting methodologies. Beyond its relevance for particle physics phenomenology, our analysis of PDF determinations provides a testbed to apply theoretical ideas about the learning process developed in the ML community.
Amedeo Chiefa, Luigi Del Debbio, Richard Kenway
Jun 23, 2026cs.LG

Silent Failures in Physics-Informed Neural Networks: Parameter Poisoning and the Limits of Loss-Based Validation

Physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) embed governing equations in their loss function, enabling mesh-free solutions to partial differential equations. Low training loss is treated as evidence that the learned solution is physically correct. This paper shows that assumption breaks down when encoded physics are incorrect. By perturbing PDE parameters before training, a setting we describe as physics parameter poisoning or parameter misspecification, we produce models that train to low loss but give incorrect answers; we treat the perturbation schedule as sensitivity analysis rather than only as a security threat, and none of our claims requires an adversary. Achieving low residual loss does not discriminate accurate from inaccurate solutions: poisoned models reach losses at or below the clean baseline yet differ by large margins, so driving the residual down is not evidence of physical accuracy. Across three PDE systems (Burgers equation, Navier-Stokes cavity, and convection-diffusion), poisoned models match or beat the clean-model training loss while their solutions differ by up to 71% in the fixed sweep and up to 128% under adversarial search; at Cavity Re=400 the poisoned loss falls below the clean baseline. We define a detection difficulty ratio R (solution error divided by training loss) to summarize how invisible the corruption is, though cross-PDE comparison is complicated by differences in loss scale. We test six candidate defenses, none of which reliably detects corruption across all regimes. We propose a post-hoc defense: sweeping the PDE residual loss across parameter values without retraining. The loss minimum recovers the true training parameter without external data, and generalizes across all three PDE systems. The effect holds across five network architectures (8.7K to 133K parameters), is bidirectional, and is confirmed across multiple random seeds.
David McShannon, Nicholas Dietrich
Jun 30, 2026cs.LG

Robustness of neural networks to random noise perturbations of their inputs

We investigate the problem of the robustness of a trained neural network to the perturbation of its input values. More specifically, we examine the interplay between the accuracy of the network, as measured by the mean squared error, and robustness. Accordingly, we present a robustness measure, which, with high probability, suggests an upper bound on the mean squared error of the network, with respect to an input data set, for a given perturbation of the input values of the network. The measure we propose is both simple and efficient to compute, treating the neural network as a black box. We provide experimental results on several real-world data sets showing the efficacy of the proposed method. We also introduce the concept of robustness curves, which allows us to further analyse robustness within and between data sets.
Mark Levene, Martyn Harris