主 Lund 平面遗漏了什么：用模型缝合诊断喷沫标记器的表征差距

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Lund-plane and Particle Transformer (ParT) jet taggers can differ in performance because one representation is weaker, or because a weaker downstream computation reads an adequate one. Standalone performance cannot separate these. Model stitching can: it links the frozen early layers of one network to the frozen late layers of another through a single trained linear map. As a positive control we use an incomplete Lund representation, the primary declustering branch, whose deficit is known independently. Stitched into ParT's downstream, it reaches a background rejection at least as much as its own downstream recovers, yet far below ParT's background rejection: the deficit is representational, not computational. A hypergraph reader over splitting triplets does no better, ruling out higher-order correlations as the cause. The gap is invisible in AUC, which stays within 1\% of its target value, and appears only in background rejection at low signal efficiency. It localizes to 0.6\% of background jets, at and above the top mass, with more constituents but fewer primary splittings than typical background. Rebuilding the representation on the full Cambridge/Aachen declustering tree repairs the deficit as predicted: standalone rejection rises, closing 72\% of the gap. Masking nodes at inference shows the repaired network still relies almost entirely on the primary branch; the secondary splittings make the representation learnable rather than supplying information it reads. Along the primary branch, the widest-angle splitting, near the top and $W$ opening angles, is worth nearly twice a random one. For quark/gluon tagging the primary branch is far less deficient, retaining 77.6\% of ParT's rejection (46.9\% for top), and the full tree closes only 33\% of the gap (72\% for top).

Submission history

From: Saurabh Rai [view email]
[v1] Tue, 27 Oct 2026 12:34:16 UTC (307 KB)