Solving Differential Equations with Constrained Learning
Viggo Moro, Luiz F. O. Chamon

TL;DR
This paper introduces a science-constrained learning framework for solving PDEs that improves accuracy and robustness by incorporating structural constraints and prior knowledge, reducing hyperparameter sensitivity and computational costs.
Contribution
It develops a novel constrained learning approach that addresses limitations of existing neural PDE solvers, enabling more reliable and efficient solutions with less hyperparameter tuning.
Findings
The SCL framework achieves accurate PDE solutions across various architectures.
It naturally incorporates structural constraints and prior knowledge.
The method often reduces computational costs compared to traditional neural approaches.
Abstract
(Partial) differential equations (PDEs) are fundamental tools for describing natural phenomena, making their solution crucial in science and engineering. While traditional methods, such as the finite element method, provide reliable solutions, their accuracy is often tied to the use of computationally intensive fine meshes. Moreover, they do not naturally account for measurements or prior solutions, and any change in the problem parameters requires results to be fully recomputed. Neural network-based approaches, such as physics-informed neural networks and neural operators, offer a mesh-free alternative by directly fitting those models to the PDE solution. They can also integrate prior knowledge and tackle entire families of PDEs by simply aggregating additional training losses. Nevertheless, they are highly sensitive to hyperparameters such as collocation points and the weights…
Peer Reviews
Decision·ICLR 2025 Poster
I think the main strength of this paper is that it allows one to reason more formally about the PINN-type setup and connect it directly to the weak form solution. It's a creative idea to adapt the result from adversarial robustness. The paper is mostly well written.
The main weakness of the paper is that we don't get any sense of how well this actually works for solving PDEs. Like many "deep learning for PDEs" papers, it does not compare to conventional methods for solving PDEs, but only other neural networks. It is currently unclear whether PINNs and related ideas are actually ever a good idea. Very few papers examine the actual Pareto curve of computational cost versus accuracy with respect to, e.g., FEM. A recent paper reviewing the area has shed lig
Overall the paper is well written and formatted and the development of Science Constrained Learning (SCL) is well described. There are several different background techniques described in the paper, in addition to the new technique. I think this work is worthy of inclusion in the conference and I am leaning towards an acceptance.
There are several different background techniques described in the paper, in addition to the new technique. Therefore, I think it would be beneficial to the readability of the paper to include a clear list of the scientific contributions of SCL to help the reader. I note that the paper is a full 10 pages long, however I think that some of the background could be shortened somewhat (especially in the introductory sections) in order to give the description of the new technique a bit more room to b
The strength of the paper is their proposed solution to the hyperparameter issue: They develop a science-constrained learning (SCL) framework. It demonstrates that finding a (weak) solution of a PDE is equivalent to solving a constrained learning problem with worst-case losses. The paper provides ways of incorporating structural knowledge, observational knowledge, and science-contrained learning. The algorithm is easy to follow, and the mathematical proofs are helpful in terms of understandin
The reviewer is having a difficult time distinguishing the contribution from the work of Paris Perdikaris and his group. Examples are: A. Daw, J. Bu, S. Wang, P. Perdikaris, A. Karpatne, Rethinking the Importance of Sampling in Physics-informed Neural Networks, arXiv preprint arXiv:2207.02338 S. Wang, S. Sankaran, P. Perdikaris, Respecting causality is all you need for training physics-informed neural networks, arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.07404 Paris references in one of his talks a paper by
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsAdvanced Data Processing Techniques · Neural Networks and Applications · Educational Technology and Assessment
