Mathematical nuances of Gaussian process-driven autonomous experimentation

The fields of machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI) have transformed almost every aspect of science and engineering. The excitement for AI/ML methods is in large part due to their perceived novelty, as compared to traditional methods of statistics, computation, and applied mathematics. But clearly, all methods in ML have their foundations in mathematical theories, such as function approximation, uncertainty quantification, and function optimization. Autonomous experimentation is no exception; it is often formulated as a chain of off-the-shelf tools, organized in a closed loop, without emphasis on the intricacies of each algorithm involved. The uncomfortable truth is that the success of any ML endeavor, and this includes autonomous experimentation, strongly depends on the sophistication of the underlying mathematical methods and software that have to allow for enough flexibility to consider functions that are in agreement with particular physical theories. We have observed that standard off-the-shelf tools, used by many in the applied ML community, often hide the underlying complexities and therefore perform poorly. In this paper, we want to give a perspective on the intricate connections between mathematics and ML, with a focus on Gaussian process-driven autonomous experimentation. Although the Gaussian process is a powerful mathematical concept, it has to be implemented and customized correctly for optimal performance. We present several simple toy problems to explore these nuances and highlight the importance of mathematical and statistical rigor in autonomous experimentation and ML. One key takeaway is that ML is not, as many had hoped, a set of agnostic plug-and-play solvers for everyday scientific problems, but instead needs expertise and mastery to be applied successfully. Graphical abstract