Evaluates a graph neural network's ability to reconstruct particle-flow objects (charged and neutral hadrons) from detector-level tracks and calorimeter clusters in high-pileup simulated events. It probes multi-task learning for particle classification and momentum/energy regression under realistic collider conditions. Use when the user wants to benchmark on DELPHES simulated QCD multijet and ttbar events, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Efficiency.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill mlpf-particle-flow-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Mlpf Particle Flow Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-mlpf-particle-flow-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: mlpf-particle-flow-eval
description: Evaluates a graph neural network's ability to reconstruct particle-flow objects (charged and neutral hadrons) from detector-level tracks and calorimeter clusters in high-pileup simulated events. It probes multi-task learning for particle classification and momentum/energy regression under realistic collider conditions. Use when the user wants to benchmark on DELPHES simulated QCD multijet and ttbar events, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Efficiency.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2101.08578
bibtex_key: pata2021mlpf
confidence: high
---
# mlpf-particle-flow-eval
> MLPF: Efficient machine-learned particle-flow reconstruction using graph neural networks — Pata et al. (2021) (arXiv:2101.08578, 2021)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates a graph neural network's ability to reconstruct particle-flow objects (charged and neutral hadrons) from detector-level tracks and calorimeter clusters in high-pileup simulated events. It probes multi-task learning for particle classification and momentum/energy regression under realistic collider conditions.
## Datasets
- **DELPHES simulated QCD multijet and ttbar events** — total ?; splits: train (-1), val (-1); repo https://github.com/jpata/particleflow
## Metrics
- `Efficiency` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- True positive rate for particle identification, calculated as TP / (TP + FN). Measures the fraction of true particles correctly reconstructed.
- `Fake rate` — range: [0, 1]
- False positive rate for spurious particle reconstruction, calculated as FP / (FP + TN). Measures the fraction of reconstructed particles that are not present in the truth.
- `pT(E) resolution` — range: other
- Standard deviation of the relative difference between predicted and true transverse momentum or energy, typically std((p_pred - p_true) / p_true).
- `η resolution` — range: other
- Standard deviation of the pseudorapidity prediction error, std(η_pred - η_true).
- `N resolution` — range: other
- Standard deviation of the predicted versus true particle multiplicity per event, std(N_pred - N_true).
## Input / output format
**Input**: Graph-structured detector data containing tracks and calorimeter clusters for each event, representing a high-pileup environment.
**Output**: Per-particle multi-class labels (e.g., charged hadron, neutral hadron) and continuous regression targets for transverse momentum (pT), energy (E), and pseudorapidity (η).
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_metrics(predictions, truth):
# Classification metrics per particle class
tp = sum(pred == true & true == class_label)
fn = sum(pred != true & true == class_label)
fp = sum(pred == class_label & true != class_label)
tn = total_negatives - fp
efficiency = tp / (tp + fn)
fake_rate = fp / (fp + tn)
# Regression resolutions
pt_res = std((p_pred - p_true) / p_true)
eta_res = std(eta_pred - eta_true)
n_res = std(N_pred - N_true)
return efficiency, fake_rate, pt_res, eta_res, n_res
```
## Common pitfalls
- Performance on photons, electrons, and muons is not reported in detail due to DELPHES dataset limitations and parametrized tracking efficiency.
- Model was trained on an unweighted ttbar sample, causing underprediction in the high-pT tail for neutral hadrons and photons.
- No event or particle weighting was applied during evaluation, which may skew performance on rare kinematic configurations.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> In Fig. 7, we see that the $\eta$ -dependent charged hadron efficiency (true positive rate) for the MLPF model is somewhat higher than for the rule-based PF baseline, while the fake rate (false positive rate) is equivalently zero, as the DELPHES simulation includes no fake tracks.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{pata2021mlpf,
title={MLPF: Efficient machine-learned particle-flow reconstruction using graph neural networks},
author={Pata et al. (2021)},
year={2021},
note={arXiv:2101.08578}
}
```
- arXiv: 2101.08578
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!