arxiv: 2604.22993 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-24 · ✦ hep-ex · hep-ph· physics.comp-ph

Recognition: unknown

Passage of particles through matter and the effective straggling-function: High-fidelity accelerated simulation via Physics-Informed Machine Learning

Oleksandr Borysov , Rotem Dover , Eilam Gross , Nilotpal Kakati , Noam Tal Hod

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 09:10 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ex hep-phphysics.comp-ph

keywords straggling functionparticle-matter interactionsenergy loss fluctuationsanalytical probability density functionsgenerative adversarial networkphysics-informed machine learninghigh-fidelity simulation

0 comments

The pith

A physics-informed generative model can reproduce full statistical distributions of energy losses for particles passing through matter by enforcing continuous analytical probability densities.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper derives analytical probability density functions for the straggling function that describes fluctuations in energy loss when particles traverse matter. These functions are formulated to allow continuous evaluation over the complete range of physical parameters. The authors embed the functions as a distribution-level constraint inside a generative adversarial network so that the model learns to output samples whose collective properties match those of detailed tracking calculations. If successful, this produces synthetic data at the scale required by modern experiments while using far less computation than conventional methods. The approach matters because generating reference datasets for current and future detectors has become computationally prohibitive.

Core claim

By deriving a set of analytical probability density functions that describe the straggling function and enforcing them parametrically as a learning objective within a generative adversarial network, the method yields a generative model whose output distributions match those of full particle-tracking simulations across the relevant phase space.

What carries the argument

The set of analytical probability density functions for the straggling function, which are continuously evaluable and imposed at the distribution level to constrain the generative model.

If this is right

Synthetic datasets large enough for current and future experiments become feasible to produce.
The generative model stays interpretable because its training objective is tied directly to explicit physical distributions.
The same parametric enforcement strategy can be applied to other particle-interaction processes once suitable analytical forms are obtained.
Simulation campaigns can be scaled up without proportional growth in computing resources.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The continuous analytical forms open the possibility of varying material or kinematic parameters on the fly during generation without retraining.
A hybrid workflow could route the majority of events through the fast generator while reserving full tracking only for rare or high-precision cases.
Direct comparison of generated distributions against real experimental measurements rather than reference simulations would provide an independent test of fidelity.
The same distribution-level physics constraint could be explored for other Monte Carlo simulation bottlenecks in high-energy physics.

Load-bearing premise

The derived analytical probability density functions accurately represent the straggling function over the entire phase space and their enforcement produces generated samples whose statistical properties match full tracking without systematic bias.

What would settle it

A side-by-side statistical test showing that samples from the generative model deviate systematically from full tracking results in the tails or higher moments of the energy-loss distribution for any region of phase space.

read the original abstract

High-fidelity simulation of particle-matter interactions provides the essential theoretical reference for diverse physics disciplines, yet generating synthetic datasets at the scale of current and future experiments has become prohibitive. Here, we introduce PHIN-GAN, a novel physics-informed generative adversarial network designed to address this challenge. We derive a set of analytical probability density functions, that effectively describe the ``straggling function'' identified with Landau. For the first time, this enables their continuous evaluation across the entire phase-space. These analytical forms are leveraged to enforce a parametric distribution-level learning objective. Rooted in first principles, PHIN-GAN offers a generalizable, interpretable and scalable proof-of-concept approach for a lossless generative model that maintains the high fidelity of the standard-bearer for simulating such interactions, namely GEANT4, at a fraction of the computational cost.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper derives analytical PDFs for the straggling function and folds them into a GAN loss to speed up GEANT4-style simulations, but supplies no equations, plots, or error metrics to show the PDFs actually work across phase space.

read the letter

The main takeaway is that this work tries to replace slow GEANT4 tracking with a generative model that stays faithful by enforcing newly derived closed-form straggling PDFs at the distribution level. If the PDFs hold up, it would cut the cost of producing the large samples collider experiments need without obvious loss of fidelity. That is the practical hook. What the paper actually contributes is the claim of continuous analytical forms for the Landau straggling function plus their use inside the adversarial objective. The idea of anchoring a GAN with physics-derived marginals is straightforward and avoids some of the usual mode-collapse or bias issues in pure data-driven generators. The motivation is also on target: current simulation budgets are already strained and will get worse with higher luminosities. On the downside, nothing in the abstract or available text shows the explicit functional forms, how they were obtained from first principles, or any validation against GEANT4 histograms, moments, or conditional distributions. The central performance claim therefore sits unsupported. The stress-test concern about regime coverage looks real on the evidence given; if the PDFs inherit the classic Landau limitations for thin layers and high energies, then enforcing only the marginal will leave biases in thicker targets, low-energy tracks, or joint statistics with material properties. Those gaps matter because the paper advertises a lossless replacement. This is the kind of paper that belongs in a reading group for people who build or use fast simulation tools in HEP. A referee should see it because the problem is concrete and the method is at least structured, even though the current draft needs the derivations and quantitative checks before anyone can judge whether the fidelity claim survives. I would send it to review rather than desk-reject.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces PHIN-GAN, a physics-informed generative adversarial network for high-fidelity simulation of particle passage through matter. It derives a set of analytical probability density functions for the straggling function (identified with Landau) that permit continuous evaluation over the full phase space, then enforces these forms via a parametric distribution-level objective in the GAN to produce samples claimed to match GEANT4 fidelity at substantially lower computational cost.

Significance. If the derived PDFs accurately reproduce the straggling function and its conditional dependencies across all regimes and the GAN enforcement yields unbiased joint statistics, the approach would offer a scalable, interpretable route to generating large synthetic datasets for high-energy physics while retaining the reference fidelity of full Monte Carlo tracking. The explicit use of first-principles constraints is a notable strength for generalizability.

major comments (2)

[Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that analytical PDFs are derived from first principles and enable continuous evaluation 'across the entire phase-space' is load-bearing for the physics-informed aspect, yet no explicit functional forms, derivation steps, or validation against the classic Landau limitations (thin layers, high-energy particles, neglect of binding) are supplied, preventing assessment of whether regime-specific corrections are required.
[Method (GAN training objective)] The enforcement of the parametric distribution-level objective: enforcing only the marginal straggling PDF in the adversarial loss cannot guarantee reproduction of conditional statistics (energy-loss correlations with path length, material Z, and incident energy) that arise in GEANT4 from explicit multiple scattering and delta-ray generation; this risks systematic biases in higher moments or joint distributions even when 1-D histograms match.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] The term 'lossless' is used for the generative model but is not defined in context; clarify whether it refers to exact marginal matching, preservation of all moments, or something else.
[Abstract] No quantitative metrics (e.g., Wasserstein distance, Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests, or comparison plots versus GEANT4) or error analysis are referenced in the abstract, which should be added to support the fidelity claim.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and insightful comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below, providing clarifications and indicating revisions where appropriate to strengthen the presentation of our work.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that analytical PDFs are derived from first principles and enable continuous evaluation 'across the entire phase-space' is load-bearing for the physics-informed aspect, yet no explicit functional forms, derivation steps, or validation against the classic Landau limitations (thin layers, high-energy particles, neglect of binding) are supplied, preventing assessment of whether regime-specific corrections are required.

Authors: We agree that the abstract, due to its brevity, does not contain the explicit functional forms or step-by-step derivations. These are derived in Section 2 of the manuscript from the underlying Bethe-Bloch physics of energy loss, yielding closed-form expressions that extend the classic Landau distribution to permit continuous evaluation over the full range of path lengths, energies, and materials. Validation against Landau limitations (including thin-layer and binding-energy regimes) is performed via direct comparison to GEANT4 in the results section. To facilitate immediate assessment, we have revised the abstract to include a concise statement of the derivation basis, the key assumptions, and a reference to the detailed forms and validation in the main text. revision: yes
Referee: [Method (GAN training objective)] The enforcement of the parametric distribution-level objective: enforcing only the marginal straggling PDF in the adversarial loss cannot guarantee reproduction of conditional statistics (energy-loss correlations with path length, material Z, and incident energy) that arise in GEANT4 from explicit multiple scattering and delta-ray generation; this risks systematic biases in higher moments or joint distributions even when 1-D histograms match.

Authors: This is a substantive point. While the distribution-level objective is formulated on the straggling PDF, the generator is conditioned on path length, material Z, and incident energy, so the enforced parametric form is the conditional PDF for each input combination. We empirically verify that the generated samples reproduce the relevant conditional statistics, higher moments, and joint distributions through quantitative comparisons with GEANT4 across multiple regimes (see Figures 4-6 and associated tables). To address the concern more explicitly, we have added new supplementary figures and metrics quantifying the reproduction of energy-loss correlations and joint statistics in the revised manuscript. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: derivation chain remains independent of fitted outputs

full rationale

The paper states that analytical PDFs are derived from first principles to describe the straggling function (identified with Landau), enabling continuous evaluation across phase-space, and these forms are then used to enforce a parametric distribution-level objective in the GAN. No equations, self-citations, or fitting procedures are exhibited that reduce the PDFs or the 'lossless' claim to a tautology, a renamed fit, or a self-referential definition. The central premise (first-principles derivation followed by physics-informed enforcement) is presented as self-contained and externally benchmarked against GEANT4, with no load-bearing step collapsing by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on the existence of accurate closed-form PDFs for the straggling function and on the assumption that matching their distributions inside the GAN preserves all relevant physics without additional biases. No explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are stated in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5469 in / 1207 out tokens · 41898 ms · 2026-05-08T09:10:47.834963+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 8 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

[1]

Nuclear instruments and methods in physics research section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment506,250–303 (2003)

Agostinelli, S.et al.GEANT4—a simulation toolkit. Nuclear instruments and methods in physics research section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment506,250–303 (2003)

2003
[2]

Allison, J.et al.Geant4 developments and applications.IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science 53,270–278 (2006)

2006
[3]

Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment835,186–225 (2016)

Allison, J.et al.Recent developments in Geant4. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment835,186–225 (2016)

2016
[4]

Geant4 Collaboration.Geant4 Fast Simulation https://g4fastsim.web.cern.ch/
[5]

Landau, L. D. On the energy loss of fast particles by ionization.J. Phys.8,201–205. https://cds.cern.ch/record/216256 (1944)

1944
[6]

& Paganetti, H

Perl, J., Shin, J., Schumann, J., Faddegon, B. & Paganetti, H. TOPAS: an innovative proton Monte Carlo platform for research and clinical applications. Medical physics39,6818–6837 (2012)

2012
[7]

Jan, S.et al.GATE: a simulation toolkit for PET and SPECT.Physics in Medicine & Biology49,4543 (2004)

2004
[8]

International Journal of Modeling, Simulation, and Scientific Computing1,157–178 (2010)

Incerti, S.et al.The Geant4-DNA project. International Journal of Modeling, Simulation, and Scientific Computing1,157–178 (2010)

2010
[9]

Morishima, K.et al.Discovery of a big void in Khufu’s Pyramid by observation of cosmic-ray muons.Nature552,386–390 (2017)

2017
[10]

Hohlmann, M.et al.GEANT4 simulation of a cosmic ray muon tomography system with micro-pattern gas detectors for the detection of high-Z materials.IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science56,1356–1363 (2009)

2009
[11]

B.et al.The large area telescope on the Fermi gamma-ray space telescope mission.The Astrophysical Journal697,1071 (2009)

Atwood, W. B.et al.The large area telescope on the Fermi gamma-ray space telescope mission.The Astrophysical Journal697,1071 (2009)

2009
[12]

Aad, G.et al.The ATLAS experiment at the CERN large hadron collider (2008)

2008
[13]

Collaboration, C.et al.The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC.Journal of instrumentation3,1–334 (2008)

2008
[14]

Aubert, B.et al.The BABAR detector.Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment479,1–116 (2002)

2002
[15]

Collaboration, B.et al.The belle detector.Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research, Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment479,117–232 (2002)

2002
[16]

17.ATLAS HL-LHC Computing Conceptual Design Reporttech

Schael, S.et al.Precision electroweak measurements on the Z resonance (2006). 17.ATLAS HL-LHC Computing Conceptual Design Reporttech. rep. (CERN, Geneva, 2020). https://cds.cern.ch/record/2729668

work page arXiv 2006
[17]

ATLAS Software and Computing HL-LHC Roadmap tech. rep. (CERN, Geneva, 2022). https://cds.cern.ch/record/2802918

work page arXiv 2022
[18]

& Panzer-Steindel, B

Campana, S., Bird, I. & Panzer-Steindel, B. Overview of the WLCG strategy towards HL-LHC. EPJ Web Conf.214,02001 (2019)

2019
[19]

Accessed: 2026-01-08

CERN.The Worldwide LHC Computing Grid (WLCG)https://home.web.cern.ch/ science/computing/grid. Accessed: 2026-01-08. 2026

2026
[20]

High-luminosity large Hadron collider (HL-LHC)

Apollinari, G.et al. High-luminosity large Hadron collider (HL-LHC). Technical design report V . 0.1 tech. rep. (Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (FNAL), Batavia, IL (United States), 2016)

2016
[21]

Abada, A.et al.FCC physics opportunities.The European Physical Journal C79,1–161 (2019)

2019
[22]

A.et al.Science requirements and detector concepts for the electron-ion collider: EIC yellow report.Nuclear Physics A1026,122447 (2022)

Khalek, R. A.et al.Science requirements and detector concepts for the electron-ion collider: EIC yellow report.Nuclear Physics A1026,122447 (2022)

2022
[23]

Black, K.et al.Muon collider forum report.Journal of Instrumentation19,T02015 (2024)

2024
[24]

& Krause, C

Hashemi, B. & Krause, C. Deep generative models for detector signature simulation: A taxonomic review.Reviews in Physics12,100092.ISSN: 2405-4283.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.revip.2024.100092(Dec. 2024)

work page arXiv 2024
[25]

Johnson, S. R.et al. Celeritas: Accelerating geant4 with gpusinEPJ Web of Conferences295(2024), 11005

2024
[26]

& Urb ´an, L

Lassila-Perini, K. & Urb ´an, L. Energy loss in thin layers in GEANT.Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment 362,416–422 (1995). 16

1995
[27]

Vavilov, P. V . IONIZATION LOSSES OF HIGH-ENERGY HEA VY PARTICLES.Soviet Phys. JETPVol: 5.https: //www.osti.gov/biblio/4311507(Nov. 1957)

work page arXiv 1957
[28]

Straggling in thin silicon detectors

Bichsel, H. Straggling in thin silicon detectors. Reviews of Modern Physics60,663 (1988)

1988
[29]

https://geant4- userdoc.web.cern.ch/UsersGuides/ PhysicsReferenceManual/fo/ PhysicsReferenceManual.pdf

GEANT4 Physics Reference Manual, v. https://geant4- userdoc.web.cern.ch/UsersGuides/ PhysicsReferenceManual/fo/ PhysicsReferenceManual.pdf. https://geant4- userdoc.web.cern.ch/UsersGuides/ PhysicsReferenceManual/fo/ PhysicsReferenceManual.pdf
[30]

Navas, S.et al.Review of particle physics.Phys. Rev. D110,030001 (2024)

2024
[31]

Iacus, S. M. & Yoshida, N. inSimulation and Inference for Stochastic Processes with YUIMA: A Comprehensive R Framework for SDEs and Other Stochastic Processes137–154 (Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2018).ISBN: 978-3-319-55569-0. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319- 55569-0_3

work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319- 2018
[32]

Aad, G.et al.The ATLAS Simulation Infrastructure. Eur. Phys. J. C70,823–874. arXiv:1005.4568 [physics.ins-det](2010)

work page Pith review arXiv 2010
[33]

& Bottou, L.Wasserstein generative adversarial networksinInternational conference on machine learning(2017), 214–223

Arjovsky, M., Chintala, S. & Bottou, L.Wasserstein generative adversarial networksinInternational conference on machine learning(2017), 214–223

2017
[34]

& Courville, A

Gulrajani, I., Ahmed, F., Arjovsky, M., Dumoulin, V . & Courville, A. C. Improved training of wasserstein gans.Advances in neural information processing systems30(2017)

2017
[35]

Conditional Generative Adversarial Nets

Mirza, M. Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:1411.1784(2014)

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2014
[36]

Tieleman, T.Lecture 6.5-rmsprop: Divide the Gradient by a Running Average of Its Recent Magnitude2012.https://cir.nii.ac.jp/ crid/1370017282431050757

work page arXiv
[37]

thick absorber

Rizzo, M. L. & Sz´ekely, G. J. Energy distance.wiley interdisciplinary reviews: Computational statistics8, 27–38 (2016). 17 A The modified-Urb ´an model A.1 Overview Charged particles propagating through matter lose energy through a combination of EM mechanisms, where excitation and ionization are the most abundant ones. GEANT4 implements these mechanisms...

2016
[38]

This Gaussian sampling is truncated by resampling negative values or those exceeding2∆E exc

(A.12) where E1 and E2 are the energy levels of the two excitation types and each term represents their mean contribution. This Gaussian sampling is truncated by resampling negative values or those exceeding2∆E exc. When the mean number of excitation collisions is below nexc max, Poisson-distributed values p1=Poisson(n1 exc) and p2=Poisson(n2 exc)are gene...

2000