Abstract


For a few years now, the High Energy Physics (HEP) community has started to substantially explore Machine Learning techniques for a diverse variety of tasks and, as such, a large number of ideas, applications, and tools are being published. This is not only the case within experimental collaborations, but also among the phenomenology and formal theory communities. Even more, as we head towards the High Luminosity era of the Large Hadron Collider (HL-LHC), in which unprecedented amount of highly complex data need to be simulated, collected, and finally analyzed, the importance of building reliable and more efficient methods, techniques, and workflows for HEP is becoming compulsory. As the community has already realized, ML plays a crucial role in this development. In particular, ML, together with new frontiers in hardware acceleration, provide a potential solution to meet the expected computing resources for simulating and reconstructing the products of the collisions and will also be essential for developing novel strategies for triggering and reconstructing data, as well as for the statistical analysis, interpretation, and preservation of such data. This represents a brand new field of research, which effectively complements the HL-LHC physics program. Furthermore, supported by the largely enhanced precision expected at the HL-LHC, dedicated ML methods will provide great opportunities to pursue data-driven searches, i.e. for anomaly detection, data quality monitoring and efficient background estimation. However, to ensure a systematic implementation of ML methods in the HEP workflows, one needs to carefully study their properties and capabilities against complex, high-dimensional data and to assess their ability to match the required precision, typically much higher than that of industrial and “real-life” applications. This program, which can go under the name of “Precision ML”, cannot be separated from the development of novel techniques for hardware acceleration, the design of reliable quality metrics, and the proper assessment of the relevant uncertainties. We believe that the joint effort of experts from the INFN theory and experimental communities can help shape this Precision ML program and contribute to it.

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

Research


Our approach consists in splitting the workflow leading to measurements and NP searches in tasks, organized in 4 work packages (WPs), each of which we aim at optimizing with ML techniques; a fifth WP is devoted to general ML applications and insight on ML algorithms:

WP1: THEORY INPUTS

  • Extraction of theory inputs: SM parameters and Parton Distribution Functions;
  • Simulation of MC events beyond LO;
  • Inclusion of theory and detector effects: showering, hadronization and detector response;

WP2: DATA ACQUISITION

  • Implementation of algorithms for online triggers, taggers, anomaly detection and data quality monitoring;
  • Implementation of algorithms for offline analysis through object reconstruction, jet clustering, boosted object tagging, particle flow, etc.

WP3: DATA ANALYSIS AND STATISTICAL INFERENCE

  • Perform statistical inference within and beyond the SM through several techniques with varying level of model dependence: anomaly detection, statistical learning, parametrized neural networks, model  dependent searches, etc.;

WP4: RESULTS PRESENTATION, DISTRIBUTION AND PRESERVATION

  • Present results delivering full likelihood (or even full statistical model) information and by publishing enough information to allow for preservation and reinterpretation;

WP5: GENERAL ML TOOLS AND OTHER STUDIES

  • Develop general ML tools such as physics inspired evaluation metrics and new sampling and integration techniques suitable for different tasks;
  • Implement physics informed algorithms that exploit symmetries or properties of the data;
  • Study general properties of density estimation and generative models performances;
  • Emulation of self-consistent mean field as a function of particle/nucleon positions to accelerate nuclear interaction models of interest for medical applications;

 

National Coordinator:  Riccardo Torre (Sezione di Genova)


Genova (GE)

  • Staff members
  • Andrea Coccaro, Simone Marzani, Fabrizio Parodi, Carlo Schiavi, Federico Sforza, Riccardo Torre
  • Post-doc
  • Francesco Armando di Bello, Marco Letizia
  • Ph.D. students
  • Samele Grossi

Milano (MI)

  • Staff members
  • Stefano Carrazza, Stefano Forte, Alessandro Vicini, Marco Zaro
  • Post-doc
  • Ph.D. students
  • Andrea Barontini, Niccoló Laurenti

Roma (RM1)

  • Staff members
  • Stefano Giagu, Valerio Ippolito, Carlo Mancini Terracciano, Andrea Messina, Stefano Rosati, Safai Tehrani Francesco, Luca Silvestrini
  • Post-doc
  • Andrea Ciardiello
  • Ph.D. students

News

Map of INFN facilities

Next meeting

September 23-24, 2025

Login Form

csn2 csn3 csn4 csn5 infn uffcom amministrazione-trasparente lhcitalia sxt