Comparing Machine Learning and Interpolation Methods for Loop-Level Calculations
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The need to approximate functions is ubiquitous in science, either due to empirical constraints or high computational cost of accessing the function. In high-energy physics, the precise computation of the scattering cross-section of a process requires the evaluation of computationally intensive integrals. A wide variety of methods in machine learning have been used to tackle this problem, but often the motivation of using one method over another is lacking. Comparing these methods is typically highly dependent on the problem at hand, so we specify to the case where we can evaluate the function a large number of times, after which quick and accurate evaluation can take place. We consider four interpolation and three machine learning techniques and compare their performance on three toy functions, the four-point scalar Passarino-Veltman D0 function, and the two-loop self-energy master integral M. We find that in low dimensions (d = 3), traditional interpolation techniques like the Radial Basis Function perform very well, but in higher dimensions (d=5, 6, 9) we find that multi-layer perceptrons (a.k.a neural networks) do not suffer as much from the curse of dimensionality and provide the fastest and most accurate predictions.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 71 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Nov 2021.
Builds on
13 of 71 references.
References · 13
- 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 36,960
- 2016XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting Systemcited by 5,120
- 2015Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learningcited by 4,416
- 2016Gaussian Error Linear Units (GELUs)cited by 3,431
- 2015Variational Inference with Normalizing Flowscited by 2,161
- 2013Gaussian Processes for Big Datacited by 377
- 2018When Gaussian Process Meets Big Data: A Review of Scalable GPscited by 205
- 2016GPflow: A Gaussian process library using TensorFlowcited by 139
- 2015All you need is a good initcited by 124
- 2020GANplifying Event Samplescited by 28
- 2020i-flow: High-dimensional Integration and Sampling with Normalizing Flowscited by 26
- 2015DART: Dropouts meet Multiple Additive Regression Treescited by 15
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 1.
1 paper.