Physics-Guided, Physics-Informed, and Physics-Encoded Neural Networks in Scientific Computing

AI-generated keywords: Breakthroughs

AI-generated Key Points

Recent breakthroughs in computing power have enabled the integration of machine learning and deep learning techniques into scientific computing across fields like fluid mechanics, solid mechanics, and materials science.
Neural networks, particularly physics-guided neural networks (PgNN), physics-informed neural networks (PiNN), and physics-encoded neural networks (PeNN), play a crucial role in incorporating physical-driven or knowledge-based constraints during training.
Conventional neural networks face challenges with sparse data common in scientific fields, leading to the emergence of specialized frameworks like PgNN, PiNN, and PeNN.
Each framework offers unique advantages in modeling complex multiscale multi-physics phenomena but also presents limitations related to stability, convergence, and generalization that require further research.
The combination of scientific computing and deep learning approaches enhances forward and inverse modeling for high-dimensional problems characterized by noisy data and complex meshes governed by non-linear differential equations.
PgNN models extract latent interdependencies from sparse data, PiNN models deduce governing equations from interpolated data, and PeNN models explore extrapolation based on strong mathematical forms derived from combined datasets.
Advancements are needed to enable the use of PgNNs, PiNNs, and PeNNs in large-scale three-dimensional or multi-dimensional problems through accelerated training methods using different parallelization paradigms.

Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Authors: Salah A Faroughi, Nikhil Pawar, Celio Fernandes, Subasish Das, Nima K. Kalantari, Seyed Kourosh Mahjour

arXiv: 2211.07377v1 - DOI (cs.LG)

License: CC BY 4.0

Abstract: Recent breakthroughs in computing power have made it feasible to use machine learning and deep learning to advance scientific computing in many fields, such as fluid mechanics, solid mechanics, materials science, etc. Neural networks, in particular, play a central role in this hybridization. Due to their intrinsic architecture, conventional neural networks cannot be successfully trained and scoped when data is sparse; a scenario that is true in many scientific fields. Nonetheless, neural networks offer a strong foundation to digest physical-driven or knowledge-based constraints during training. Generally speaking, there are three distinct neural network frameworks to enforce underlying physics: (i) physics-guided neural networks (PgNN), (ii) physics-informed neural networks (PiNN) and (iii) physics-encoded neural networks (PeNN). These approaches offer unique advantages to accelerate the modeling of complex multiscale multi-physics phenomena. They also come with unique drawbacks and suffer from unresolved limitations (e.g., stability, convergence, and generalization) that call for further research. This study aims to present an in-depth review of the three neural network frameworks (i.e., PgNN, PiNN, and PeNN) used in scientific computing research. The state-of-the-art architectures and their applications are reviewed; limitations are discussed; and future research opportunities in terms of improving algorithms, considering causalities, expanding applications, and coupling scientific and deep learning solvers are presented. This critical review provides a solid starting point for researchers and engineers to comprehend how to integrate different layers of physics into neural networks.

Submitted to arXiv on 14 Nov. 2022

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

AI assistant instructions?

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2211.07377v1

Comprehensive Summary
Key points
Layman's Summary
Blog article

Recent breakthroughs in computing power have paved the way for the integration of machine learning and deep learning techniques into scientific computing across various fields such as fluid mechanics, solid mechanics, and materials science. Neural networks, in particular, play a crucial role in this hybridization, offering a foundation to incorporate physical-driven or knowledge-based constraints during training. However, conventional neural networks face challenges when dealing with sparse data common in scientific fields. To address these challenges, three distinct neural network frameworks have emerged: physics-guided neural networks (PgNN), physics-informed neural networks (PiNN), and physics-encoded neural networks (PeNN). Each framework offers unique advantages in accelerating the modeling of complex multiscale multi-physics phenomena but also presents limitations that require further research to overcome issues related to stability, convergence, and generalization. This study provides an in-depth review of these three neural network frameworks used in scientific computing research. It discusses state-of-the-art architectures, applications, limitations, and future research opportunities aimed at improving algorithms, considering causalities, expanding applications, and integrating scientific and deep learning solvers. The comparison table highlights the main characteristics of PgNNs,PiNNs,and PeNNs for modeling non-linear multiscale physiochemical phenomena with sparse datasets. The combination of scientific computing and deep learning approaches enhances forward and inverse modeling for high-dimensional problems characterized by noisy data and complex meshes governed by non-linear differential equations. This integration surpasses traditional computational mechanics solvers in scenarios where experimental data is sparse or hard-to-acquire. By utilizing PgNN models for extracting latent interdependencies from sparse data, PiNN models for deducing governing equations from interpolated data, and PeNN models for extrapolation exploration based on strong mathematical forms derived from the combined data sets. Looking ahead, further advancements are needed to enable the use of PgNNs,PiNNs,and PeNNs in large-scale three-dimensional or multi-dimensional problems. Accelerating the training of complex deep learning models through different parallelization paradigms will be essential to unlock the full potential of these frameworks in tackling challenging computational tasks across various scales. This critical review serves as a valuable resource for researchers and engineers seeking to integrate physics-based constraints into neural networks effectively.

- Recent breakthroughs in computing power have enabled the integration of machine learning and deep learning techniques into scientific computing across fields like fluid mechanics, solid mechanics, and materials science.
- Neural networks, particularly physics-guided neural networks (PgNN), physics-informed neural networks (PiNN), and physics-encoded neural networks (PeNN), play a crucial role in incorporating physical-driven or knowledge-based constraints during training.
- Conventional neural networks face challenges with sparse data common in scientific fields, leading to the emergence of specialized frameworks like PgNN, PiNN, and PeNN.
- Each framework offers unique advantages in modeling complex multiscale multi-physics phenomena but also presents limitations related to stability, convergence, and generalization that require further research.
- The combination of scientific computing and deep learning approaches enhances forward and inverse modeling for high-dimensional problems characterized by noisy data and complex meshes governed by non-linear differential equations.
- PgNN models extract latent interdependencies from sparse data, PiNN models deduce governing equations from interpolated data, and PeNN models explore extrapolation based on strong mathematical forms derived from combined datasets.
- Advancements are needed to enable the use of PgNNs, PiNNs, and PeNNs in large-scale three-dimensional or multi-dimensional problems through accelerated training methods using different parallelization paradigms.

SummaryRecent advances in computer power have made it possible to use machine learning and deep learning in science fields like fluid mechanics, solid mechanics, and materials science. Neural networks, such as physics-guided neural networks (PgNN), physics-informed neural networks (PiNN), and physics-encoded neural networks (PeNN), help incorporate physical rules during training. Specialized frameworks like PgNN, PiNN, and PeNN have been developed to address challenges with sparse data in scientific fields. These frameworks have strengths in modeling complex phenomena but also face limitations that need more research. Combining scientific computing with deep learning improves modeling for complex problems with noisy data and non-linear equations. Definitions- Computing power: The ability of a computer to process information quickly. - Machine learning: A type of artificial intelligence where computers can learn from data without being explicitly programmed. - Deep learning: A subset of machine learning that uses artificial neural networks to model complex patterns. - Neural networks: Computer systems modeled after the human brain that can learn from data. - Physics-guided neural networks (PgNN): Neural networks that incorporate knowledge from physics principles during training. - Sparse data: Data sets with very few observations or measurements. - Frameworks: Structures or systems used as a basis for organizing ideas or processes. - Multiscale multi-physics phenomena: Complex interactions between different scales and types of physical processes. - Stability, convergence, generalization: Properties related to the accuracy and reliability of models in different situations. - Forward

Recent years have seen a significant increase in the integration of machine learning and deep learning techniques into scientific computing, particularly in fields such as fluid mechanics, solid mechanics, and materials science. This is made possible by recent breakthroughs in computing power, which have paved the way for more complex and data-intensive modeling approaches. One area where neural networks have played a crucial role is in hybridizing physical-driven or knowledge-based constraints during training. However, traditional neural networks face challenges when dealing with sparse data commonly found in scientific fields. To address these challenges, three distinct neural network frameworks have emerged: physics-guided neural networks (PgNN), physics-informed neural networks (PiNN), and physics-encoded neural networks (PeNN). In this blog article, we will delve into a recent research paper that provides an in-depth review of these three frameworks used in scientific computing research. We will discuss their state-of-the-art architectures, applications, limitations, and future research opportunities aimed at improving algorithms and integrating scientific and deep learning solvers. Overview of PgNNs,PiNNs,and PeNNs Before diving into the details of each framework, let's first understand what they are and how they differ from each other. Physics-Guided Neural Networks (PgNN) PgNNs are a type of artificial intelligence model that incorporates physical laws or principles into the training process. This means that during training, the network is guided by known physical relationships to ensure that its predictions align with established theories. Physics-Informed Neural Networks (PiNN) PiNNs also incorporate physical principles but take it a step further by using them to deduce governing equations from interpolated data. This allows for more accurate predictions even when working with sparse datasets. Physics-Encoded Neural Networks (PeNN) PeNNs use strong mathematical forms derived from combined datasets to extrapolate exploration beyond known boundaries. This makes them well-suited for tackling complex problems characterized by noisy data and non-linear differential equations. State-of-the-Art Architectures, Applications, and Limitations Now that we have a basic understanding of the three frameworks, let's take a closer look at their state-of-the-art architectures, applications, and limitations. PgNNs: State-of-the-Art Architectures The most common architecture used in PgNNs is the multi-layer perceptron (MLP), which consists of an input layer, one or more hidden layers, and an output layer. Other popular architectures include convolutional neural networks (CNNs) and recurrent neural networks (RNNs). PgNNs: Applications PgNNs have been successfully applied in various fields such as fluid mechanics for predicting flow patterns around objects or structures. They have also been used in solid mechanics to predict material properties based on microstructure images. In materials science, PgNNs have been utilized to study phase transitions and predict material properties under different conditions. PgNNs: Limitations One limitation of PgNNs is that they require prior knowledge of physical laws or principles to guide the training process effectively. This means that they may not be suitable for problems where these laws are not well-established or understood. PiNNs: State-of-the-Art Architectures The most commonly used architecture in PiNNs is the residual network (ResNet), which allows for better handling of complex relationships between inputs and outputs. Other popular architectures include long short-term memory (LSTM) networks and transformer-based models. PiNNs: Applications PiNNs have shown promising results in solving inverse problems such as reconstructing 3D structures from 2D images or estimating material properties from experimental data. They have also been used to model complex phenomena like turbulent flows and heat transfer processes. PiNNS: Limitations One limitation of PiNNS is that they can only deduce governing equations if there is enough interpolated data available. This means that they may not be suitable for problems with extremely sparse datasets. PeNNs: State-of-the-Art Architectures The most commonly used architecture in PeNNs is the encoder-decoder network, which consists of two parts - an encoder that maps input data to a latent space and a decoder that generates output predictions based on this latent representation. Other popular architectures include generative adversarial networks (GANs) and variational autoencoders (VAEs). PeNNs: Applications PeNNs have been successfully applied in various fields such as fluid mechanics for predicting flow patterns beyond known boundaries or reconstructing missing data from incomplete simulations. They have also been used in solid mechanics to predict material properties under extreme conditions. PeNNS: Limitations One limitation of PeNNS is that they require strong mathematical forms derived from combined datasets, which may not always be possible or accurate. This means that their performance heavily relies on the quality and quantity of data used during training. Future Research Opportunities While PgNNs,PiNNs,and PeNNs have shown great potential in accelerating the modeling of complex multiscale multi-physics phenomena, there are still limitations and challenges that need to be addressed through further research. One area where advancements are needed is enabling the use of these frameworks in large-scale three-dimensional or multi-dimensional problems. This will require developing more efficient algorithms and utilizing different parallelization paradigms to accelerate training times. Another important aspect is considering causalities when integrating scientific and deep learning solvers. This will allow for better understanding and interpretation of results, making them more reliable for real-world applications. Expanding the applications of these frameworks beyond traditional fields like fluid mechanics and solid mechanics could also lead to new discoveries and breakthroughs in other areas such as climate science, biophysics, and geophysics. Conclusion In conclusion, recent breakthroughs in computing power have paved the way for the integration of machine learning and deep learning techniques into scientific computing. The three neural network frameworks - PgNNs, PiNNs, and PeNNs - offer unique advantages in accelerating the modeling of complex multiscale multi-physics phenomena. However, they also present limitations that require further research to overcome issues related to stability, convergence, and generalization. By effectively combining these frameworks with traditional computational mechanics solvers, we can tackle challenging computational tasks across various scales and surpass traditional methods in scenarios where experimental data is sparse or hard-to-acquire. With continued advancements and research efforts, these frameworks have the potential to revolutionize scientific computing and lead to new discoveries in various fields.

Created on 24 Apr. 2024

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Look for similar papers (in beta version)

By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.