mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Diagnosing the conditional-mean barrier in scientific machine-learning surrogates

arXiv 2605.28076 ↗First posted 27 May 2026stat.ML cs.NA math.NAcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Many prediction tasks in computational science and engineering become one-to-many after coarse graining and partial observation. In such settings, deterministic surrogates trained by squared loss may learn a well-defined mathematical object, the conditional mean, while still missing the task-relevant variability in the underlying conditional law. In this work, we formulate this limitation as the conditional-mean barrier and develop a diagnostic framework for identifying it in fitted scientific machine-learning surrogates. The framework combines residual-feature orthogonality and effect-size diagnostics to distinguish deterministic underfitting from irreducible conditional variability. We also make explicit a simple consequence of paired squared loss: stochastic outputs do not by themselves overcome the barrier, because the objective penalizes model variance and drives the predictor back to the conditional mean. The diagnosis therefore yields a modeling prescription: when residual variability matters, the loss must score richer features of the conditional law rather than a point prediction. Reproducible numerical studies on a controlled two-branch law and a two-scale Lorenz-96 closure problem show how the diagnostic identifies the barrier, how deterministic closures can suppress collective fluctuation statistics in rollout, and how a minimal likelihood-based stochastic-scale model can recover substantially more variability.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 12 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 May 2026.

Builds on

12 of 43 references.

References · 12

  1. 2020Score-Based Generative Modeling through Stochastic Differential Equationscited by 9,122
  2. 2014Conditional Generative Adversarial Netscited by 2,162
  3. 2019DeepONet: Learning nonlinear operators for identifying differential equations based on the universal approximation theorem of operatorscited by 2,018
  4. 2016Photo-Realistic Single Image Super-Resolution Using a Generative Adversarial Networkcited by 1,908
  5. 2021Image Super-Resolution via Iterative Refinementcited by 1,511
  6. 2019Normalizing Flows for Probabilistic Modeling and Inferencecited by 1,323
  7. 2018Physics-Informed Generative Adversarial Networks for Stochastic Differential Equationscited by 135
  8. 2021Learning effective stochastic differential equations from microscopic simulations: linking stochastic numerics to deep learningcited by 39
  9. 2021Normalizing field flows: Solving forward and inverse stochastic differential equations using physics-informed flow modelscited by 35
  10. 2024A Training-Free Conditional Diffusion Model for Learning Stochastic Dynamical Systemscited by 19
  11. 2020Semi Conditional Variational Auto-Encoder for Flow Reconstruction and Uncertainty Quantification from Limited Observationscited by 13
  12. 2024DynGMA: a robust approach for learning stochastic differential equations from datacited by 8

Built on by

Not cited yet.