Effect of likelihood misspecification in Gaussian process-driven autonomous experimentation
In recent years, several groups have designed Autonomous Experiment (AE) models with the aim of using them as an alternative method for neutron scattering scanning. In an AE, Gaussian processes (GPs) are most frequently used due to their interpretability, their non-parametric nature, their universal approximation, and their closed-form predictive distribution. GPs have two key components, namely, the model for the likelihood of a neutron count knowing the underlying dynamic structure factor and the acquisition function. In this paper, we investigate the impact, on the quality of an AE, of the likelihood and acquisition function choices, in energy scans and (Q, ω) ones, with respect to the signal-over-noise ratio. While we hypothesized that the quality of GP predictions would decrease when the normal to Poisson likelihood approximation breaks down at low count rates, we found that the use of the correct Poisson likelihood does not improve the quality of the data collected, as well as yields very poor results in (Q, ω) scans at low count rates. In fact, the best results are obtained with a combination of normal likelihood, including the observation noise, and the change in variance acquisition function. In addition, we find that the performance, or quality of the predictive distribution, is a misleading measure of efficiency, that is, of the quality of the data collected.