Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

FrostyFix4614 t1_ixckqxe wrote

There is a lot of "neural PDE solvers" with different features and properties. Some work only with regular spatiotemporal grid, some can be applied on arbitrary grids. Some are discrete, some are continuous. Some require a bit of data, some are very data hungry.

So, it depends on what you mean by SOTA.

Fast? FNO or any mapping-based model.

Data-efficient? Some sort of a state space model with GNN-based dynamics and node-wise encoder/decoder.

Time continuity? Something based on neural ODEs dynamics.

1

Top-Avocado-2564 t1_ixcrq8m wrote

PiNN aren't really supervised or unsupervised so to speak. It's a misleading way to think about PiNN architecture

Neural pde solvers can be of three flavours - operator learning, graph pde and purely function approximator ( lagaris 2007 ) approach.

SOTA in pinns is a bit useless. Nobody cares if you can do burgers equation as fast as possible. Real life systems are coupled, mixture of pde/ ode , possibly stiff, it's a smorgasbord of challenges.

Fno works great in some situations but it has limitations in handling stochastic multiscale systems - think high RANS

When it comes to PiNN ymmv

2

a1_jakesauce_ OP t1_ixdi3b9 wrote

I want to compare FNO to other SOTA that have been published since ICLR 21 on the 2d NS task from the FNO paper - that is, predict the scalar vorticity of NS on a regular spatial temporal grid for 20-40 time steps into the future given the first 10 solutions

1