Quasiprobabilistic Density Ratio Estimation with a Reverse Engineered Classification Loss Function

Matthew Drnevich, Stephen Jiggins, Kyle Cranmer
12/22/2025
stat.MLcs.LGhep-ex

No confident code implementation found for this paper.

Abstract

We consider a generalization of the classifier-based density-ratio estimation task to a quasiprobabilistic setting where probability densities can be negative. The problem with most loss functions used for this task is that they implicitly define a relationship between the optimal classifier and the target quasiprobabilistic density ratio which is discontinuous or not surjective. We address these problems by introducing a convex loss function that is well-suited for both probabilistic and quasiprobabilistic density ratio estimation. To quantify performance, an extended version of the Sliced-Wasserstein distance is introduced which is compatible with quasiprobability distributions. We demonstrate our approach on a real-world example from particle physics, of di-Higgs production in association with jets via gluon-gluon fusion, and achieve state-of-the-art results.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. Any repos shown below are weak matches — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{drnevich2025quasiprobabilistic,
  title  = {Quasiprobabilistic Density Ratio Estimation with a Reverse Engineered Classification Loss Function},
  author = {Matthew Drnevich and Stephen Jiggins and Kyle Cranmer},
  year   = {2025},
  eprint = {2512.19913},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2512.19913v1}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2512.19913.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2512.19913)

Discussion